Accurate sentencing information
Gonzalez-Lopez v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Juan Gonzalez-Lopez asked whether defendants may challenge any assumption or fact used to set a sentence, or only criminal-history errors when they had no lawyer.
- Who it affects
- Gonzalez-Lopez did not get Supreme Court review, and the Court gave no answer to his sentencing-information question.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court refused to hear his case (denied his petition) and did not decide that question.
The dispute asks how broadly the right to be sentenced using accurate information applies under a federal sentencing rule and an earlier Supreme Court case.
Question presented
Whether the right to be sentenced based on accurate information that the Court recognized in Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 32(i)(1)(C) and Townsend v. Burke, 334 U.S. 736 (1948), is limited to uncounseled defendants and errors about the defendant’s own criminal histories or applies to any assumption or fact cited as a basis of a sentence without giving the defendant a chance to object.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Show 2 moreShow fewer
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.