United States v. Darnell L. Walker (96-3073) William A. McKinley (96-3938)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court’s USSG § 3B1.1(c) finding was clearly erroneous where not a single witness discussed any organizational, administrative, or decisionmaking role for the defendant in the drug operation
• holding “a straightforward and simple ‘Yes, your Honor’ is sufficient to bind a defendant” to the consequences of a guilty plea
• “By now, it is well established that the preponderance standard does not violate Booker, so long as the trial court appreciates that the guidelines are advisory, not binding.”
• “[A] conspiracy is a single violation of 5 the drug laws, and the fact that this particular conspiracy was characterized by separate transactions is a fact of no legal significance.”
• prior representation of witness did not present an actual conflict of interest
• same for impact of juror riding in elevator with co-defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).