United States v. Bernardine

How courts have described this case

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

• vacating sentence and noting absence of evidence in record to clarify ambiguous statement relied upon by Government in seeking enhancement to defendant’s sentence
• “[T]he government must show the defendant was an ‘unlawful user’ of a controlled substance during the same time period as the firearm possession.” (emphasis added)
• “[T]he government must show the defendant was an ‘unlawful user’ of a controlled substance during the same time period as the firearm possession.” (emphasis added)
• the government’s proffer that it could produce witnesses whose testimony would corroborate factual allegations in the PSI was insufficient to support a sentencing enhancement
• the sentencing court can consider relevant evidence without regard to its admissibility under the rules of evidence as long as the information is sufficiently reliable to support its accuracy
• proffer of evidence insufficient to carry Government’s burden of presenting “reliable and specific” evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).