United States v. Joshua Thomas Hill

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that posting online ads for the prostitution of a minor qualifies for the enhancement
• explaining that application note 4 \was only intended to apply to the situation posited in [ section 2G1.3(b)(3)(A) ]\ (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
• “Because the application note is inconsistent with the plain language of U.S.S.G. § 2G1.3(b)(3)(B), the plain language of the guideline controls.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).