Abundis v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that valuation of losses for sentencing purposes must be reviewed under the clear error standard
• explaining that Ocampo and Mehtala held -6- 6 only that defendant's mere presence at scene of crime or mere association with criminals was insufficient to support conspiracy conviction
• explaining that Ocampo and Mehtala held _______ -6- 6 only that defendant's mere presence at scene of crime or mere association with criminals was insufficient to support conspiracy conviction
• elaborating that in the alleged multiple-conspiracies setting, \[t]he prejudice we must guard against\ is the prejudicial spillover of evidence \resulting from trying defendants en masse for distinct and separate offenses committed by others\
• noting that the district court has \broad discretion in making relevancy determinations\
• finding acquittals to be a relevant factor in upholding a district court's denial of a severance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).