United States v. Carl M. Wildes, United States of America v. Harry Cameron

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant used fire by lighting “a wooden cross as a means of intimidation”
• \Application of the rule of lenity is appropriate only when there remains ‘a grievous ambigu- ity’ in the language of the statute after a court has used every method of statutory construction to resolve it.\ (citing Chapman v. United States, 500 U.S. 453, 463 (1991)
• relying on \any felony\ language
• analyzing 18 U.S.C. § 844(h)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).