United States v. Nicole Walker

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the “district court’s factual determinations will stand unless the decision is unsupported by substantial evidence” (cleaned up)
• noting in the sentencing context that drug quantities may be proven “by circumstantial evidence and opinion testimony” (citation omitted)
• “The Guidelines do not require the government to establish the identity, quantity, or purity of methamphetamine by laboratory analysis.”
• information from users and distributors can be particularly compelling, as they “are among the most knowledgeable experts on such drugs” (quotation omitted)
• “Evidence ‘that many of the same people [were] involved with each other and sought to achieve the same objectives’ supports finding a single conspiracy.”
• “A sentencing court may determine drug quantity based on the testimony of a co-conspirator alone.” (quoting United States v. Sarabia-Martinez, 276 F.3d 447, 450 (8th Cir. 2002))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).