United States v. Matthew L. Wyss

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that cocaine purchased for resale is relevant conduct to conviction for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute
• stating that government had only one opportunity to prove drug quantity for sentencing pur- 6 No. 05-4443 poses
• stating that quantity for which the defendant should be accountable under Antonietti, in rejecting Kipp, “overlooked” the distinction Section 2D1.1(c). between conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute
• noting that the defendant has “some burden of producing evidence concerning the amount that he consumed he cannot just say to the government, ‘I’m an addict, so prove how much of the cocaine that I bought I kept for my own use rather than to resell.’ ”
• “The government [is] entitled to only one opportunity to present evidence on the issue [of relevant conduct].”
• cocaine purchased for resale is relevant conduct to conviction for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).