Jon Knutsen v. Alberto R. Gonzales

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the “plain language” of the INA “forecloses inclusion of losses stemming from unconvicted offenses”
• holding that 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(I) is unambiguous
• as noted above, holding that loss amount was not more than $10,000 when petitioner stipulated “for purposes of sentencing” that the total loss exceeded $20,000 but pled guilty to count with loss of $7,350
• “The better result here, and one consistent with the statute, is that the court should focus narrowly on the loss amounts that are particularly tethered to convicted counts alone.”
• “The better result here, and one consistent with the statute, is that the court should focus narrowly on the loss amounts that are particularly tethered to convicted counts alone.”
• as noted above, holding that loss amount was not more than $10,000 when petitioner stipulated “for purposes of sentencing” that the total loss exceeded $20,000 but pled guilty to count with loss of $7,350

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).