State of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent v. Cartell Hogue

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that whether the enforcement of an extraterritorial statute comports with due process turns on fundamental fairness and an absence of arbitrariness
• “[I]t is not arbitrary to prosecute a defendant in the United States if his ‘actions affected significant American interests’—even if the defendant did not mean to affect those interests.” (quoting United States v. Brehm, 691 F.3d 547, 552–53 (4th Cir. 2012))
• “[I]t is not arbitrary to prosecute a defendant in the United States if his ‘actions affected significant American interests’—even if the defendant did not mean to affect those interests.” (quoting United States v. Brehm, 691 F.3d 547, 552–53 (4th Cir. 2012))
• “[I]t is not arbitrary to prosecute a defendant in the United States if his ‘actions affected significant American interests’—even if the defendant did not mean to affect those interests.” (quoting United States v. Brehm, 691 F.3d 547, 552–53 (4th Cir. 2012))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).