United States v. Eric James Thornton, Jr., AKA Seal B

How courts have described this case

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

• “[C]ommentary in the Guidelines Manual that interprets or explains a guideline is authoritative unless it violates the Constitution or a federal statute, or is inconsistent with, or a plainly erroneous reading of, that guideline.” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “Because we hold that [Thornton’s prior conviction] is ‘similar’ to a conviction for driving under the influence, the district court did not need to find that No. 18‐2548 7 Thornton’s driving was impaired … in order to include that offense in calculating his criminal history score.”
• “Because we hold that [Thornton’s prior conviction] is ‘similar’ to a conviction for driving under the influence, the district court did not need to find that No. 18‐2548 7 Thornton’s driving was impaired … in order to include that offense in calculating his criminal history score.”
• “Because we hold that [Thornton’s prior conviction] is ‘similar’ to a conviction for driving under the influence, the district court did not need to find that No. 18‐2548 7 Thornton’s driving was impaired … in order to include that offense in calculating his criminal history score.”
• “Because we hold that [Thornton’s prior conviction] is ‘similar’ to a conviction for driving under the influence, the district court did not need to find that No. 18‐2548 7 Thornton’s driving was impaired … in order to include that offense in calculating his criminal history score.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).