Circuit split · criminal sentencing
Whether the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines mandate (rather than merely authorize as discretionary) a downward departure in the circumstances at issue
1 federal appellate case on this question, each acknowledging the disagreement in its own words.
- United States v. Szabo176 F3D 930
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals · April 6, 1999
“While recognizing the premise of this approach to the departure issue, we respectfully disagree with the Sixth Circuit’s conclusion in Valentine that it is mandated by the guidelines.” — Disagrees with another circuit
Empirical analysis of this case →
The other side of the split
Decisions the acknowledging court(s) named as the opposing or joined side, quoted in the acknowledging opinion's own words.
- On the other side · 6th Cir.United States v. Valentine100 F.3d 1209
“The Valentine court reached this conclusion by applying a precise mathematical continuation of the pattern used for offenses one through five.” — United States v. Szabo, acknowledging the split
What the split turns on
- Doctrines & tests:
- grouping rule (§ 3D1.4)
Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. Counter-side decisions are extracted from the acknowledging opinions' own text and linked only when the citation resolves in this corpus. See all circuit splits.