Case Citator › United States v. Atencio

United States v. Atencio

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
Tenth Circuit
Citation
476 F.3d 1099
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
43 of 43
Citing cases (total)
43
Treatment dates
2008
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. United States v. Atencio was overruled in part on its rule requiring advance notice of a sentence that varies from the advisory Guidelines range. The Supreme Court's decision in Irizarry v. United States rejected that requirement and identified Atencio among the contrary circuit decisions; the Tenth Circuit expressly recognized the overruling in United States v. Kaufman.
More on how this was screened

Atencio's other sentencing rules continue to be cited. All 43 flagged citations have been read.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

43 later cases cite United States v. Atencio; 43 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on United States v. Atencio?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • The Supreme Court held that Rule 32(h) does not require advance notice of a Guidelines variance, displacing Atencio's contrary holding.

    Irizarry v. United States · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    The fact that Rule 32(h) remains in effect today does not justify extending its protections to variances; the justification for our decision in Burns no longer exists, and such an extension is apt to complicate rather than to simplify sentencing procedures.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads United States v. Atencio and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace