United States v. Johnny Lee Napier

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that convictions that were twenty-years old for selling cocaine and some evidence of unusual behavior did not support imposition of a substance abuse treatment condition as part of the sentence for a fraud conviction
• inferring imposition of standard conditions where oral sentence advised defendant that unspecified conditions would be included in judgment
• observing that section 666(a)(1)(A) offense “contains no such element”
• vacating and remanding where “we cannot say the inclusion of . . . conditions in the written judgment created a direct conflict,” but “we do not have a complete and unambiguous sentence to leave intact”
• district court denies defendant the right to be present for the imposition of sentence if it adds nonstandard conditions to defendant’s sentence after the sentencing hearing
• later written sentence controls when it “merely clarifies an ambiguity in the oral pronouncement”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).