United States v. Prange

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that Probation was incorrect to “hold[] Defendants responsible for the full amount of the fraudulent transactions simply because they knew the transactions were fraudulent”
• noting that a court’s finding'that a defendant “exercised management responsibilities over the property, assets or activities” of the enterprise “may warrant an upward departure” (emphasis omitted)
• finding 27 manifestation of mutual assent under Ohio law where each party made a promise or began 28 1 to render performance
• noting importance of \an objective basis for the agent's understanding that [defendant] knew they were speaking in coded terms and his impression of what [defendant] actually meant\
• noting importance of \an objective basis for the agent's understanding that [defendant] knew they were speaking in coded terms and his impression of what [defendant] actually meant\
• to justify a managerial enhancement, the evidence must show that -the defendant controlled criminal actors

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).