United States v. McDonough

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that proof of conspiracy \may include the defendants' acts that furthered the conspiracy's purposes\
• stating that \[b]ribery can be accomplished through an ongoing course of conduct\ (quoting United States v. Ganim , 510 F.3d 134 , 149 (2nd Cir. 2007) )
• “[Assuming that [the district court refused to instruct the jury on] a required element, the evidence was more than sufficient to support the convictions.... [Thus,] we are confident that the same result would have obtained if [the jury was properly instructed].”
• considering nominally procedural issue \to the extent that it bears on the reasonableness of [the defendant's] sentence\
• declining “to follow McCormick v. United States” because “we have held that McCormick applies only in the context of campaign contributions”
• \[A]n agreement to join a conspiracy may . . . be proved by direct or circumstantial evidence.\ (internal citations and quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).