United States v. Francisco Corral-Ibarra and Roberto Herrera

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that because the Supreme Court has held in Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (1999
• explaining that because the Supreme Court has held in Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (1999
• “[T]he critical distinction is between direct and remote involvement in an illegal activity because only the latter will trigger a reasonable foreseeability inquiry.”
• \[T]he critical distinction is between direct and remote involvement in an illegal activity because only the latter will trigger a reasonable foreseeability inquiry.\
• refusal to discuss circumstances of offense with probation office con- stitutes failure to accept responsibility
• “The essence of aider and abettor liability is that a person is punished as a principal even though he did not commit the actual elements of the crime.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).