United States v. Cordoba-Hincapie

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’s offense level under the Guidelines must be calculated for the drug the defendant believed he was importing, not the drug actually imported
• concluding that modern, anti-drug offenses could no longer be characterized as public welfare offenses
• recognizing that “[t]he cases, despite their uneven nature, impart a clear message that there is a continuing constitutional importance to the mens rea principle^] [t]he outer limits of what is permissible have not been drawn, but such limits certainly exist”
• stating that jurisdictions that have adopted the Model Penal Code must \apply an element analysis to each offense and theory of liability\
• stating that jurisdictions that have adopted the Model Penal Code must ‘‘apply an element analysis to each offense and theory of liability”
• noting that courts generally fail to divide clearly statutory interpretation from constitutional law in the jurisprudence of mens rea

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).