United States v. Charles E. Rashid (99-2141) Jack Rashid (99-2494)

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the Sixth “Circuit has held that even when evidence is presented of activities that occurred outside of the conspiracy dates charged in the indictment (as opposed to the statute of limitations dates), that did not constitute a fatal variance” (citations omitted)
• no constructive amendment or variance when, at trial, the government presented evidence about conduct occurring in 1988, but the indictment referred only to conduct of that nature beginning in 1992
• in context of § 5K1.1 motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).