United States v. Benjamin A. Davis

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because “an arrest intervened between the offenses charged in the first indictment and the offenses charged in the second and third indictments[,] [u]nder application note 3 to section 4A1.2, the sentences imposed for those offenses were therefore unrelated”
• noting that curtailing the spread of contagious disease is a 16 legitimate penological objective
• where evidence of witness/drug addict's testimony regarding 30 to 40 prior purchases of cocaine from defendant found admissible to show intent to distribute

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).