United States v. Ricardo A. Godinez

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that kidnapping of woman, leaving her bound in apartment, then leaving to rob store, all done in rapid succession, are treated as distinct aggressions against different victims in different places
• holding that kidnapping of woman, leaving her bound in apartment, then leaving to rob store, all done in rapid succession, are treated as distinct aggressions against different victims in different places
• noting that the principle ʺ[t]hat kidnapping is a continuing offense . . . means that the statute of limitations runs from the release rather than the capture of the victimʺ
• “one crime hard on the heels of another can be a ‘separate and distinct criminal episode’, as Schieman itself shows”
• a kidnapping and a robbery were not a “single occa- sion” where the defendant “committed his crimes against No. 22-1926 9 different victims, in different places, more than an hour apart” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “Godinez ... committed his crimes against different victims, in different places, more than an hour apart. It would strain language considerably, without serving any purpose plausibly attributed to Congress, to treat the kidnapping and the robbery as a single ‘occasion.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).