United States v. Bolds
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CLAY, Circuit Judge.
Defendant Roxie Nicole Bolds (“Bolds”) challenges, on reasonableness grounds, the twenty-four-month sentence imposed by the district court following its revocation of Bolds’ four-year term of supervised release. Bolds argues that the district court committed procedural error by failing to adequately explain its upward departure from the four to ten month advisory sentencing range contained in the United States Sentencing Commission’s (“Sentencing Commission”) policy statements regarding supervised release revocation sentences. For the reasons that follow, we AFFIRM…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Gall v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Pierce v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Rita v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Kimbrough v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by330 opinions
- United States v. Patrick WandahsegaCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019
- United States v. Lacresha SlappyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2017
- United States v. Khalil Abu RayyanCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018
- United States v. Herrera-ZunigaCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
- United States v. DeitzCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
325 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.