USA v. Gregory Turbe

Circuit 3Jul 31, 2026

Split Score

SplitScore: 58/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Affirmed

The Third Circuit held that the district court did not violate Gregory Turbe’s due-process rights by mentioning—but not relying on—his prior arrests when imposing a within-Guidelines sentence for marijuana distribution. The panel rejected Turbe’s procedural and substantive challenges and therefore affirmed the sentence.

View Full Opinion Document (PDF)

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Whether Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(d)(2) categorically requires inclusion of arrests that did not lead to convictions in a presentence report (PSR).

Circuit Positions

Circuit 1Circuit 5Circuit 10

Rule 32(d)(2) requires the PSR to include arrests not leading to conviction.

Circuit 9

Rule 32(d)(2) does not categorically require inclusion of such arrests; inclusion is discretionary.

Circuit 3(this circuit)

Third Circuit declines to resolve the issue and takes no definitive stance in this opinion.

Conflict Summary

Several circuits interpret Rule 32(d)(2) as mandating that a PSR list all prior arrests even when they did not result in convictions, whereas the Ninth Circuit has read the Rule to give district courts discretion, and the Third Circuit in this opinion declines to decide the issue.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:Gregory Turbe
Appellee:United States of America

Legal Counsel

Appellant:Matthew A. Campbell, Office of the Federal Public Defender, District of the Virgin Islands
Appellee:Meredith J. Edwards and Adam Sleeper, United States Attorney’s Office, District of the Virgin Islands