United States v. Richard Hough (00-3380) Lamont Needum (00-3381) Anthony Gibbs (00-3417) Chad Gibbs (00-3434) Antwan Woods (00-3592)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that juvenile behavior constituted “relevant conduct” because, in the context of § 1B1.3, “a federal district court may consider any relevant conduct when sentencing a defendant, whether or not the conduct is a federal crime”
• explaining that “a federal district court may consider any relevant conduct when sentencing a defendant, whether or not the conduct is a federal crime” (citation omitted)
• finding that “[t]his argument cannot be seriously entertained. It is patently absurd to regard disposition on direct appeal as ‘new evidence’ that would justify a new trial”
• noting that the defendant could have retrieved a gun located upstairs whenever he desired
• finding a defendant’s unprosecutable juvenile drug sales “relevant” to determining the quantity of drugs he sold for sentencing purposes
• rejecting defendant’s argument that firearms located at his residence cannot be attributed to him because he did not exclusively reside in the home

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).