United States v. George Mooneyham

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a co-conspirator’s statements made “with the intention of reassuring [an undercover agent] of [Defendant]’s reliability as a supplier” were made in furtherance of the conspiracy
• stating that co-defendant’s out-of-court statements to an undercover officer whose status was unknown to the declarant were nontestimonial
• finding that where a co-conspirator’s statement is “directed at a potentially recurring customer . . . with the intention of reassuring him of defendant’s reliability as a supplier,” the statement is in furtherance of the conspiracy
• finding a co-defendant’s out-of-court statements to an undercover officer whose status was unknown to the declarant were nontestimonial
• because of a mandatory minimum sentence, the “applicable guideline range was effectively 120 to 137 months” although it would have otherwise been 110 to 137 months
• “Co-conspirator statements in furtherance of a conspiracy are both inherently trustworthy and „firmly rooted.‟”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).