United States v. James Cantu Sanchez

How courts have described this case

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

• same for a defendant who rammed a border patrol agent with his car and physically assaulted the agent after later being confronted
• “We need not decide whether specific intent to injure is required to find that a defendant used an object, such as a car, as a deadly weapon in an assault on a federal 3 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1
• “no intent to injure is required”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).