Eighth Circuit· 8/27/2007

United States v. Hartstein

Citations

500 F.3d 790
2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 20274
2007 WL 2409857

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that the “defendant’s actual, subjective intent ... should drive our analysis”
concluding that the “defendant’s actual, subjective intent . . . should drive our analysis”
“Summary tables of accounting data that are based on evidence not before the court, and that a party has challenged as inaccurate, are not sufficient to support a court’s factual findings.”
“[W]hen a defendant’s only subjective intent regarding repayments relates to this illegal purpose of perpetuating the scheme, a sentencing court may refuse to credit repayments against sums received from the victims.”
“Summary tables of accounting data that are based on evidence not before the court, and that a party has challenged as inaccurate, are not sufficient to support a court’s factual finding.”
“The government need not present -6- evidence as to each alleged victim, as [defendant] challenges neither the characterization of many of her lenders as victims nor the loan amounts claimed by the government as to many of these victims”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Melloy, Smith, Benton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

22 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named United States v. Hartstein

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

United States v. Hartstein
Eighth Circuit· 2009-03-09· cited 5×

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.