Legal Opinion

United States v. Carlos Castillo

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Decided April 18, 1991No. 89-6302PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

This single issue appeal raises the question of whether a counterfeit currency detector found in the possession of defendant is a “counterfeiting device” which permits enhancement of a sentence under section 2B5.1(b)(2) of the Sentencing Guidelines. Although we regard it as a close question, we affirm the district court’s decision that it is.

Defendant Carlos Castillo was found guilty of unlawfully bringing approximately $8,000 in counterfeit United States currency into this country. 18 U.S.C. § 472. At sentencing, the district court concluded that defendant’s base level should be increased…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Dr. Henry McLemore II v. Paul J. Landry, Sun Belt Federal Bank v. River Villa PartnershipCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. United States v. Ted Allen, AKA Ted Alan WachtinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
  2. United States v. Mario J. TaylorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
  3. United States v. Suárez-GonzálezCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2014
  4. United States v. Rodney HollomanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
  5. United States v. Suarez-GonzalezCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2014

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API