United States v. Israel Salgado

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that § 2S1.1(a)(1) is such an “express” exception because it explicitly applies “[n]otwithstanding § 1B1.5(c)”
• stating “relevant conduct for Chapter Three adjustments is limited to [the defendant’s] part in. the money laundering offense”
• “[The] application note’s meaning for this case is straightforward: When the district court calculated [the defendant’s] offense level under § 2S1.1(a)(1
• “When the district court calculated Salgado’s offense level under § 2S1.1(a)(1), it could base a role enhancement on his conduct in the money laundering conspiracy but not on his conduct in the underlying drug conspiracy.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).