United States v. Michael E. Jones, United States of America v. Ralph Milton Pfeister

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that three separate, unrelated, drug sales would not establish a continuing series
• recognizing three nonexclusive factors to consider are “1
• affirming denial of motion for recusal where defendant, who sought recusal of any judicial officer executing any wiretap orders or search warrants, failed to show any specific facts indicating personal bias
• Wharton's Rule inapplicable because Congress never manifested intent to restrict federal conspiracy statute
• use of informants, toll records, and physical surveillance sufficient
• \substantial\ income found where defendant received $150,000 from drug sales

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).