Jeffrey K. Markoff v. Puget Sound Energy, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that conviction under Pinkerton theory could serve as predicate § 924(c) crime of violence because “[d]efendants found guilty . . . under either a Pinkerton or aiding-and-abetting theory are treated as if they committed the offense as principals”
• explaining that because “[d]efendants found guilty of armed bank robbery under either a Pinkerton or aiding-and-abetting theory are treated as if they committed the offense as principals,” “Davis does 14 not conflict with or undermine the cases upholding § 924(c
• rejecting argument that § 924(c) conviction was invalid if predicate offense was based on Pinkerton liability
• rejecting argument that § 924(c) conviction was invalid if predicate offense was based on Pinkerton liability
• upholding a 315-day delay as reasonable due, in part, to the complexity of the case even though the defendant was in pretrial detention
• aiding and abetting armed bank robbery is a crime of violence under § 924(c)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).