United States v. Shengyang Zhou

How courts have described this case

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

• holding an alleged restitution error was not plain
• “[W]e have held under the plain error standard that failure to assert a factual dispute at sentencing waives the challenge because it prevented the probation officer from reviewing and the district court from resolving the fact issue.”
• “Mr. Zhou’s final argument is that the district court erred in ordering him to pay $417,396.39 in restitution .,. under the [MVRA].... Where the defendant failed to object [to a restitution award], ... we review only for plain error.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).