United States v. Christopher J. Stolee

How courts have described this case

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

• upholding the dis- trict court’s application of section 2F1.1(b)(8)(B) to a defendant who 6 UNITED STATES v. PENDERGRAPH was the sole owner and president of the corporation that received the fraudulently obtained funds
• affirming enhancement because, as the sole owner and president of the company, the defendant “arranged for the funds to be deposited into an account he controlled, and he directed how the funds were used” and therefore “indirectly bene-fitted from the illegally derived funds”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• United States v. Daniel I. Colton, United States of America v. Daniel I. Colton
  Fourth Circuit· 2000-11-03· cited 133×
• United States v. Aurelio Cano-Flores
  D.C. Circuit· 2015-08-07· cited 58×
• United States v. Edelkind
  First Circuit· 2006-10-31· cited 53×
• United States v. Gharbi
  Fifth Circuit· 2007-12-17· cited 26×
• United States v. Darrell Glenn Pendergraph
  Fourth Circuit· 2004-10-28· cited 13×
• United States v. Maack
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1999-07-19· cited 3×
• United States v. Edelkind
  First Circuit· 2006-09-13
• United States v. Pendergraph
  Fourth Circuit· 2004-10-28

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• United States v. John G. Bennett, Jr.
  Third Circuit· 1998-11-16· cited 131×
• United States v. Arlie D. Maggard, United States of America v. Daisy Dawn Maggard, United States of America v. Timothy J. Maggard
  Eighth Circuit· 1998-10-26· cited 69×
• United States v. Kohli
  Ninth Circuit· 1997-04-14· cited 24×