United States v. Ryan Daniel Lee

How courts have described this case

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

• appearing to hold that “an unregistered sawed-off Marlin Model 60G .410 caliber shotgun, m[et] the statutory definition of ‘destructive device,’” when this was undisputed by the parties and without specifically relying on the bore diameter to do so
• application of both Guidelines when offense involved destructive device was clearly intended by Sentencing Commission, and subsections were sufficiently conceptually separate notions to support application of both

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).