United States v. Ronald Eugene Davis

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “sole fact that two underlying offenses share a common modus operandi has no bearing on whether the criminal cases associated with them are factually related”
• holding that sentences were not effectively consolidated where defendant given concurrent sentences by two different state courts
• holding that modus operandi not enough to demonstrate common scheme or plan
• reviewing de novo trial court’s determination that two prior convictions were not “related” and thus did not have to be counted as one prior for purposes of sentence enhancement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).