Case Citator › United States v. Vega-Castillo

United States v. Vega-Castillo

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

Declined by some courts
Court
Eleventh Circuit
Citation
540 F.3d 1235
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
214 of 214
Citing cases (total)
307
Treatment dates
2010
Declined by some courts
At least one reviewed court has declined to follow this case. No reviewed court has overruled it. United States v. Vega-Castillo has one confirmed declined-to-follow treatment, listed below. All 214 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The Sixth Circuit rejected Vega-Castillo's distinction between congressional and Sentencing Guidelines policy and adopted the contrary rule permitting variances based on fast-track disparities. The other opinions applied Vega-Castillo's prior-panel-precedent rule, rejected arguments that later decisions had displaced it, or used nearby adverse language about another authority. Two vacated opinions cited Vega-Castillo positively and produced no treatment entries.

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.

307 later cases cite United States v. Vega-Castillo; 214 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. Vega-Castillo?

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

Declined to Follow

  • The court rejected Vega-Castillo's distinction between congressional and Guidelines policy and held that district courts may vary based on fast-track disparities.

    United States v. Camacho-Arellano · Sixth Circuit · filed

    The latter three circuits distinguished Kimbrough by reading it as authorizing district courts to vary based on disagreements with Guidelines policy, not based on disagreements with congressional policy. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d at 559; Gonzalez-Zotelo, 556 F.3d at 740-41; Vega-Castillo, 540 F.3d at 1239. We find this distinction unpersuasive.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads United States v. Vega-Castillo 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