Skip to content
Try for free
Back to judgment

Citation network

United States Vs. Labonte

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 07, 1997

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

43 entries 2 linked 41 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Hernandez US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1834
  2. Pennsylvania Ex Rel. Sullivan Vs. Ashe US Supreme Court · Nov 08, 1937
  3. U.S. 751 (1997) October Term, 1996 Syllabus United States V. Labonte
    Search
  4. h)'s plain and unambiguous language and therefore must give way. Stinson v. United
    Search
  5. Moskal v. United
    Search
  6. see Mis tretta v. United
    Search
  7. will be applied even though the defendant may otherwise be eligible for the increased penalty. 2 See United States v. Smith
    Search
  8. United States v. Garrett
    Search
  9. United States v. Amis
    Search
  10. United States v. Sanchez-Lopez
    Search
  11. the ensuing appeals and a divided panel, applying the approach set forth in Chev ron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural
    Search
  12. Amendment 506, the First Circuit here reached the same conclusion as the Ninth Circuit later did in United States v. Dunn
    Search
  13. h)'s plain language, it must give way. Cf. Stinson v. United
    Search
  14. We similarly 3 See United States v. McQuilkin
    Search
  15. United States v. Branham
    Search
  16. United States v. Fountain
    Search
  17. United States v. Novey
    Search
  18. the criminal justice system, and is appropriate, so long as it is not based upon improper factors. See United States v. Armstrong
    Search
  19. Wayte v. United
    Search
  20. issue here unambiguous, we need not decide whether the Commission is owed deference under Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural
    Search
  21. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural
    Search
  22. see Smiley v. Citibank
    Search
  23. See generally Mistretta v. United
    Search
  24. Koon v. United
    Search
  25. See Staples v. United
    Search
  26. Liparota v. United
    Search
  27. and it grows out of pre-Guideline sentencing law, see, e. g., Woodson v. North
    Search
  28. Smiley v. Citibank
    Search
  29. were the Commission a typical administrative agency. This Court has previously implied that this is so. See Stinson v. United
    Search
  30. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. LTV
    Search
  31. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Schor
    Search
  32. Syllabus United States V. Labonte
    Search
  33. Stinson v. United
    Search
  34. See United States v. Smith
    Search
  35. U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural
    Search
  36. Cf. Stinson v. United
    Search
  37. See United States v. McQuilkin
    Search
  38. See United States v. Armstrong
    Search
  39. Mistretta v. United
    Search
  40. Woodson v. North
    Search
  41. Sullivan v. Ashe
    Search
  42. See Stinson v. United
    Search
  43. United States v. Dunn
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales