United States v. Robert J. Prendergast, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court abused its discretion by imposing conditions of alcohol prohibition, drug testing, and warrantless searches which bore no reasonable relationship to the conviction of wire fraud
• vacating 11 Here, the District Court did not point to any evidence that any of the § 3553(a) factors were present in Pruden’s case. As for § 3553(a)(1
• “The focus for sentencing purposes under § 2F1.1 should be on the amount of possible loss the defendant attempted to inflict on the victim.”
• district court abused its discretion where it left restitution issue open to uncertain date in light of possibility defendant's financial circumstances might improve
• condition that wire fraud convict not possess alcohol excessive since no evidence showed convict abused alcohol
• no authority exists for sentencing court to leave question of restitution open to uncertain date

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).