In U.S. v. Allmendinger, involving an insurance scam run by Allmendinger and others, Allmendinger received a much longer prison sentence than a co-conspiriator, which he appealed. The appeals court held:

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Allmendinger's appeal regarding the disparity in sentencing between him and a co-conspirator would not be directly addressed by the options provided, such as cooperation with authorities, the constitutionality of the Sentencing Guidelines, the nature of the injury, or the amount of losses involved. Appeals courts consider a variety of factors in their decisions, and none of the given choices specifically address a common ground for appeal in such cases, which often involve arguments about procedural errors, the application of sentencing guidelines, or the reasonableness of the sentence given the specifics of the case.

In US V Allmendinger, Involving an Insurance Scam Run by Allmendinger and Allmendinger