United States v. Jerome L. Murphy

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that lack of mens rea requirement in USSG § 2K2.1(b)(4) does not violate due process
• noting that \[a] statute may provide criminal liability without mens rea consistent with due process if it is a regulatory measure in the interest of public safety\
• noting that “[a] statute may provide criminal liability without mens rea consistent with due process if it is a regulatory measure in the interest of public safety”
• noting that this court does not infer mens rea requirement when interpreting the Guidelines
• distinguishing Staples, finding mens-rea-less offense-level increase did not violate due process
• differentiating “the requisite intention for conviction of a crime” from “sentencing enhancements”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).