TANNER ADVERTISING GROUP, L.L.C., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

v.

FAYETTE COUNTY, GEORGIA, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (34 total)

• United States v. Pugh, 515 F.3d 1179 (11th Cir. 2008)
  …y many of these offenders for long-term and in some cases, lifelong monitoring and oversight.” Allison, 447 F. 3d at 405-06 (quoting H.R.Rep. No. 108-66, at 49-50 (2003), reprinted in 2003 U.S.C.C.A.N. 683, 684; and citing United States v. Moriarty, 429 F. 3d 1012, 1025 (11th Cir.2005)). As the Fifth Circuit put it in another child pornography case, “[i]t is precisely this type of offender that supervised release was designed to rehabilitate.” United States v. Armendariz, 451 F. 3d 352, 362 n. 6 (5th Cir.20…
• United States v. Davila., 569 U.S. 597 (U.S. 2013)
  …rror standard of Rule 52(a) rather than the plain-error standard of Rule 52(b), the rule that ordinarily attends a defendant's failure to object to a Rule 11 violation. See supra, at 2146 - 2147; 664 F. 3d, at 1358 (citing United States v. Moriarty, 429 F. 3d 1012, 1019 (C.A.11 2005) (per curiam )). Having explained why automatic vacatur of a guilty plea is incompatible with Rule 11(h), see supra, at 2148 - 2150 and this page, we leave all remaining issues to be addressed by the Court of Appeals on remand.…
• United States v. Westry, 524 F.3d 1198 (11th Cir. 2008)
  …ct court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo, and its factual findings for clear error. See United States v. Watkins, 477 F. 3d 1277, 1279 (11th Cir.2007). We review de novo the legality of a sentence. See United States v. Moriarty, 429 F. 3d 1012, 1025 (11th Cir.2005). As to a challenge for reasonableness, we review the sentences “under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard.” Gall v. United States, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 586, 591, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Defendants were sentenced as fol…