United States v. Anthony Valdez

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the failure to inquire whether parties wanted the jury to decide forfeiture did not meet the third and fourth requirements for plain-error correction when evidence supported the court's award
• noting that the failure to inquire whether parties wanted the jury to decide forfeiture did not meet the third and fourth requirements for plain-error correction when evidence supported the court’s award
• noting that the failure to inquire whether parties wanted the jury to decide forfeiture did not meet the third and fourth requirements for plain-error correction when evidence supported the court’s award
• affirming application of enhancement where defendant operated a pain management clinic and billed Medicare for more expensive visits and procedures than were actually performed
• collecting cases involving false bookkeeping entries, unauthorized check signatures, and commingling legitimate with illegitimate transactions
• noting the argument that “the enhancement does not apply where the mass-marketing is not targeted at the specific victims of the fraud” is “foreclosed by circuit precedent”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).