Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Tenth Circuit· 3/4/2016

United States v. Burkholder

Citations

  • 816 F.3d 607
  • 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 4118
  • 2016 WL 851830

How courts have described this case

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

  • defining and analyzing the concepts of but-for and proximate causation in the context of a criminal prosecution
  • defining and analyzing the concepts of but-for and proximate causation in the context of a criminal prosecution
  • explaining why the plain language of section 841(b)(1) does not impose a proximate-cause requirement
  • “Congress clearly knew how to add a proximate-cause requirement in criminal penalty-enhancement statutes when' it wished to do so. That it nevertheless did not do so in § 841(b)(1)(E
  • “[Section] 841(b)(l)(E)’s provision that ‘death ... results from the use’ of a Schedule III controlled substance requires only proof of but-for causation.”
  • “In our adversary, common-law system, courts properly answer only the questions that the parties present to them and that are necessary for the resolution of the case at hand.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Briscoe, Holmes, Bacharach

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

84 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named United States v. Burkholder

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.