United States v. Sherry Washington

How courts have described this case

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

• upholding the district court’s loss determination where the defendant “provided no estimates” to contradict the “available information” that the court relied on
• “Accordingly, we hold that . . . review of the legal conclusion that a person is an organizer or leader . . . is also deferential.”
• “Considering the evidence of Washington’s role in generating the invoices, getting the invoices paid, and in making payments . . . it was reasonable for a jury to infer her knowledge and intent.”
• conclusively addressing previously unresolved standard of review regarding a district court’s decision to apply the Section 3B1.1 sentencing enhancement
• “Indeed, it would have been justified in finding the amount of loss to be the entire $3.32 million because it found that the entire wellness program was a sham.”
• “The district court is in the best position to know whether [a defendant] was a leader or organizer under Section 3B1.1 given the evidence presented and the nature of the conspiracy.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).