United States v. Getto

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 Fourth Amendment generally does not require 11 “suppressing evidence collected by foreign law enforcement authorities abroad”
• “Before sentencing a defendant based on the conduct of co- conspirators, . . . a district court is required to make two particularized findings: (1
• “[C]onduct does not shock the judicial conscience when it is ‘simply illegal,’ rather, it must be ‘egregious’”
• \[T]he scope of conduct for which a defendant can be held accountable under the sentencing guidelines is significantly narrower than the conduct embraced by the law of conspiracy.\ (citation omitted)
• “Defendant’s allegations, even if credited, demonstrate only robust information-sharing and cooperation across parallel investigations and do not contradict the government’s claim that the [foreign] investigation was not controlled or directed by American law enforcement.”
• declining to adopt “joint venture doctrine” to Fourth Amendment challenge

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).