Danny Demon Austin v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding “it was reasonably foreseeable that a person swimming across a high-traffic ship channel in the dark of night would be struck by a passing ship”
• IFP status of civil rights plaintiff did not exempt him from requirement that witness 19 fees be tendered with subpoena
• “[T]he enhancement applies for creating a risk of harm; no harm at all need actually occur to warrant its application.”
• the “precise nature of the [resulting] injury and the manner of its infliction is immaterial . . . , so long as the injury is of a type that, in the circumstances, might reasonably have been expected to occur”
• declining to decide whether reasonable foreseeability is required

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).