Connection lost
Server error
United States v. Robinson Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Defendant challenged sentencing enhancements and denial of an acceptance of responsibility reduction after pleading guilty to interstate violation of a protective order. The appellate court affirmed the sentence as reasonable, upholding the district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines.
Legal Significance: This case clarifies post-Booker sentencing review standards, affirming de novo review for legal interpretations of Sentencing Guidelines and clear error for factual findings, all under an overarching “reasonableness” standard for the sentence itself.
United States v. Robinson Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Anthony Robinson pled guilty to interstate violation of a protective order under 18 U.S.C. § 2262, having fled Washington for Maine with his wife, Rebecca, in contravention of an order protecting her. The order stemmed from Robinson’s prior assaults on Rebecca. While incarcerated pending sentencing, Robinson wrote letters to his wife, some threatening, in continued violation of the protective order. The district court, sentencing post-United States v. Booker, treated the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines (USSG) as advisory. It applied a two-level enhancement under USSG § 2A6.2(b)(1)(D) for a “pattern of activity involving stalking, threatening, harassing, or assaulting the same victim,” based on Robinson’s prior assaults and the letters written from jail. The court also denied a sentence reduction for acceptance of responsibility (USSG § 3E1.1), citing Robinson’s attempts to justify his conduct and his ongoing prohibited contact with Rebecca. The resulting Guidelines range (63-78 months) exceeded the statutory maximum of 60 months, leading the court to impose the maximum sentence.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did the district court err in applying a sentencing enhancement for a pattern of activity and denying a reduction for acceptance of responsibility, thereby rendering the imposed sentence unreasonable under the advisory Sentencing Guidelines framework established by United States v. Booker?
The sentence was affirmed as reasonable. The district court correctly applied the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in cul
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Did the district court err in applying a sentencing enhancement for a pattern of activity and denying a reduction for acceptance of responsibility, thereby rendering the imposed sentence unreasonable under the advisory Sentencing Guidelines framework established by United States v. Booker?
Conclusion
This case reinforces the advisory nature of the Sentencing Guidelines post-*Booker* and Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint
Legal Rule
Post-*United States v. Booker*, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad mi
Legal Analysis
The appellate court first addressed the standard of review post-*Booker*, confirming that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit an
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Post-Booker, a district court’s legal interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines is