United States v. Gary L. Dolan

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the district court need not accept a defendant’s “self serving assertions at sentencing”
• explaining that the receipt by mail of life-insurance proceeds from policy insuring victim constituted an overt act in furtherance of a conspiracy to commit murder-for-hire
• explaining that the receipt by mail of life- insurance proceeds from policy insuring victim constituted an overt act in furtherance of a conspiracy to commit murder-for-hire
• “Statutes of limitations in criminal cases ‘are to be liberally interpreted in favor of repose.’ ”
• although factual determinations for sentencing under the federal guidelines are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard, “[w]e review de novo the district court’s interpretation of the Guidelines”
• “To be sufficient, an indictment must fairly inform the defendant of the charges against him and allow him to plead double jeopardy as a bar to future prosecution.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).