United States v. Paul R. Edgecomb (88-3853) and Gordon R. Edgecomb (88-3943)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding it insufficient when the sentencing judge only questioned defendant on certain aspects of the presentence report
• holding it insufficient when the sentencing judge only questioned defendant on certain aspects of the presentence -8- report
• holding that inquiry concerning presentence report not sufficient
• conspiracy is a continuing crime, and “venue is proper in any district along the way”
• the elements of a charge need not be explained further by the district court where the charge “is simple enough for a lay person to understand”
• “continuing crimes” straddle guidelines, therefore, Act is applicable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).