United States v. Yeje-Cabrera

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that incidental discriminatory purpose does not warrant strict scrutiny under the dormant Commerce Clause
• concluding that two sets of claims both involved a common nucleus of 25 operative fact where they arose from defendant’s “conduct while [plaintiff] was an employee and 26 specifically from the events leading to his termination”
• determining that “dramatically different” 21 accounts of an incident was substantial evidence for an 22 adverse credibility determination
• recognizing no vindictiveness in “regurgitating” the gun when the plea deal fell through
• opining that rule of procedure requiring criminal forfeiture to be incorporated into judgment of conviction “is largely a housekeeping rule and does not itself go to any fundamental rights of defendants”
• reviewing for plain error defendant’s Sixth Amendment argument when defendant’s objection at sentencing concerned only the sufficiency of the evidence and not defendant’s constitutional rights

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).