United States v. Thong Vang and Neng Vue

How courts have described this case

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

• interpreting a similar statute to mean that a defendant may act “for the purpose of’ engaging in sexually illicit conduct even if he has more than one purpose
• discussing the history of § 2423(b) and its roots in the Mann Act
• affirming use of § 2A3.1 as offense guideline for sentencing defendant convicted of violating § 2324(b) because defendant used force during the commission of the sexual assault meriting application of § 2A3.1 as opposed to § 2A3.2
• interpreting Mortensen v. United States, 322 U.S. 369, 376 (1944)
• reviewing factual finding for clear error

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).