United States v. Paul David Anderson

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that we review the factual finding of a particular victim’s unusual vulnerability for clear error
• stating that we review the factual finding of a particular victim’s unusual vulnerability for clear error
• observing that the phrase “large number” as used in section 3A1.1(b)(2) of the Guidelines is “largely uninterpreted”
• affirming the application of the enhancement to an investment advisor who “persuaded ... clients to exchange [their] investments for ‘private tender offers’ ” in the advisor’s company, giving “him complete discretion over client funds”
• “We review the factual finding of whether a [fraud] scheme qualifies as ‘sophisticated’ for clear error.” (quoting United States v. Brooks, 174 F.3d 950, 958 (8th Cir. 1999))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).