United States v. Warren Collins

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that when defendant did not dispute any facts supporting career offender status, there is no constitutional violation in relying on defendant’s prior convictions
• holding that intent to distribute can also be inferred from “the amount of cash seized with the drugs.”
• holding that, where defendant did not dispute any facts supporting the career offender status in district court, there is no constitutional violation in relying on defendant’s prior convictions
• holding that, where defendant did not dispute any of the facts supporting career offender status in district court, there is no constitutional violation in relying on defendant’s prior convictions
• holding that defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to trial by a jury was not violated by district court’s reliance on his prior convictions for purposes of sentencing as career offender
• holding that, where defendant did not dispute any of the facts supporting the career offender status in district court, there is no constitutional violation in relying on defendant’s prior convictions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).