United States v. Michael Roussel

How courts have described this case

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

• deciding that the parties’ disagreement over the standard of review was “moot” because instruction error was harmless
• holding that a defendant invited error by introducing evidence that he later argued was inadmissible
• holding that a defendant invited error regarding the issuance of a Rule 404(b) jury instruction because he requested the introduction of the prior acts evidence necessitating issuance of the instruction
• providing that this court may affirm the district court’s application of the Guidelines on any basis supported by record
• “ ‘Substantial sums’ ... cannot constitute an estimate of an intended benefit for the purpose of the sentencing guidelines enhancement.”
• “‘Substantial sums’ . . . cannot constitute an estimate of an intended benefit for the purpose of the sentencing guidelines enhancement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).