United States v. Anthony McCloud

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that two drug sales had the common purpose of “distribut[ing] drugs”
• recognizing that “distribut[ing] drugs” can be a common purpose
• explaining that whether conduct is part of a common scheme or plan “is an alternative basis for a finding of relevant conduct that is not subject to the same-course-of-conduct factors” (emphasis omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• United States v. Norman West
  Sixth Circuit· 2020-06-12· cited 51×
• United States v. Marquise Figures
  Sixth Circuit· 2025-05-21· cited 18×
• United States v. Zachariah Jay Histed
  Sixth Circuit· 2024-02-22· cited 12×
• United States v. Lamonte Brown
  Sixth Circuit· 2025-03-06· cited 8×
• United States v. Troy Edward Bush
  Sixth Circuit· 2022-11-18
• United States v. David Myrie
  Sixth Circuit· 2026-02-17

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• United States v. Alicio M. Sanchez (89-2432) and Reinaldo Cubilla (89-2433)
  Sixth Circuit· 1991-03-28· cited 272×
• United States v. Deitz
  Sixth Circuit· 2009-08-20· cited 204×
• United States v. Marie Antoinette Jackson-Randolph
  Sixth Circuit· 2002-05-02· cited 189×
• United States v. Greeno
  Sixth Circuit· 2012-05-21· cited 156×
• United States v. Jesse James Vandeberg
  Sixth Circuit· 2000-01-14· cited 151×
• United States v. Richard Charles Bartholomew, Warren Gene Harris and Juleen Nicole Henry
  Sixth Circuit· 2002-11-15· cited 105×
• United States v. Elder
  Sixth Circuit· 1996-09-18· cited 103×
• United States v. Catalan
  Sixth Circuit· 2007-08-22· cited 68×
• United States v. Lavadius Faison
  Sixth Circuit· 2003-09-12· cited 49×
• United States v. Karl Amerson
  Sixth Circuit· 2018-03-27· cited 31×
• United States v. Kathryn Simmerman
  Sixth Circuit· 2017-03-09· cited 27×
• United States v. William Schock
  Sixth Circuit· 2017-07-10· cited 22×