United States v. Mike Mustafa A/K/A Darwish Mustafa

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that any misrepresentations regarding sentencing calculations “were dispelled when [the defendant] was informed in open court that there were no guarantees as to sentence, and that the court could sentence him to the maximum”
• suggesting, but not deciding, that “the continued relevance of Smith is open to question”
• fine is a form of punishment, whereas restitution is merely intended to compensate victims
• fine is a form of punishment, whereas restitution is merely intended to compensate victims
• “[A]ny alleged misrepresentations that [defendant’s] former counsel may have made regarding sentencing calculations were dispelled when [defendant] was informed in open court that there was no guarantee as to sentence, and that the court could sentence him to the maximum.”
• “[A]ny alleged misrepresentations that [defendant's] former counsel may have made regarding sentencing calculations were dispelled when [defendant] was informed in open court that there were no guarantees as to sentence, and that the court could sentence him to the maximum.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).