United States v. Zhen Zhou Wu

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the challengers of the regulation cannot claim they lacked fair notice because they “knew they were violating U.S. export regulations.”
• suggesting that the conviction would have stood if “the prosecution [did] persuade the jury ... that the phase shifters really did fall within the Munitions List restrictions as those restrictions stood at the time of the defendants’ exports”
• stating that a charging document was sufficient to establish the ACCA’s different-occasions requirement
• finding the jury instruction problematic because it relied on a State Department designation that “had [not] been made at the time that the defendants engaged in the charged conduct”
• rejecting claimed lack of fair notice by challengers who had concerns about the law’s application to them yet failed to pursue an available, official answer on the matter
• rejecting claimed lack of fair notice by challengers who had concerns about the law's application to them yet failed to pursue an available, official answer on the matter

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).