United States v. Brijido Mejia-Pimental

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court erred as a matter of law by denying safety valve relief on improper grounds
• holding that review of the district court’s factual determination that a defendant is ineligible for safety valve relief is for clear error
• stating that we review for clear error the factual determination that a defendant is eligible for safety-valve relief
• reviewing de novo a district court’s statutory interpretation of the safety-valve statute
• reviewing de novo a district court’s statutory interpretation of the safety-valve statute
• “The defendant bears the burden of proving safety valve eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).