United States v. Christopher Gill

How courts have described this case

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

• holding any error as to drug amount harmless where “the sentence either way is subject to the same guideline range”
• stating that “the district court’s findings must be supported by a preponderance of the evidence”
• noting that “[p]ossessing drugs for personal use was not part of or connected to the commission of, preparation for, or concealment of the distribution-type offense,” without explanation
• excluding purported amount for personal use yielded two-level difference in offense level
• “A defendant is responsible for all drug quantities that are included within the scope of his ‘relevant conduct.’”
• “A defendant is responsible for all drug quantities that are included within the scope of his ‘relevant conduct.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).