96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4598, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 7402 United States of America v. Prakash Man Shrestha, Cross-Appellee

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that defendant need not satisfy requirements of section 3E1.1 to be eligible for relief under section 3553(f)
• concluding that the defendant was not disqualified from obtaining safety valve relief where he initially confessed all his µnowledge and involvement, but then recanted that confession at trial
• noting that whether defendant had been completely truthful for purposes of y 3553(f)(5) was a factual matter
• explaining that “[t]he safety valve statute is not concerned with sparing the government the trouble of prepping for and proceeding with trial” in finding defendant safety-valve eligible after trial
• deeming such a denial “irrelevant” to the safety valve analysis where the defendant has otherwise provided truthful information
• outlining two separate “burden[s]” on the defendant and government in safety valve cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).