Legal Opinion

United States v. Pedro Payano

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided July 10, 2019No. 18-1153PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KRAUSE, Circuit Judge.

Appellant Pedro Ramon Payano appeals his sentence on the ground that the District Court's mistaken belief as to the applicable statutory maximum constitutes plain error. In his view, this error warrants resentencing by way of analogy to Molina-Martinez v. United States where the Supreme Court held that an incorrectly calculated United States Sentencing Guidelines range presumptively satisfies the prejudice prong of plain-error review because of its "centrality" to a district court's sentence. --- U.S. ----, 136 S. Ct. 1338 , 1346, 194 L.Ed.2d 444 (2016). We agree that…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. Gall v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. United States v. Omar FolkCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2020
  2. Sergio Calderon-Rosas v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2020
  3. United States v. Eric ScottCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2021
  4. Christopher Rad v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2020
  5. United States v. James Johnman, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2020

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API