Legal Opinion
United States v. Kevin Jemel Mickens
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided July 3, 2006No. 05-3377PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SUTTON, Circuit Judge.
Kevin Jemel Mickens challenges his 30-month sentence for possession of counterfeit devices and counterfeit-device-making equipment. In his view, the district court miscalculated the loss from the counterfeit scheme, mixing intended and actual loss in a way that gave him a higher guidelines range than the facts of this case permit. Concluding that the district court’s loss calculation was not clearly erroneous, we affirm.
I
On August 20, 2004, Lance Arzu entered eight banks in the Ashtabula, Ohio area, seeking to obtain cash advances using fraudulent Discover credit…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- United States v. Derek A. Vaughn, Zaza Leslie LindoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
- United States v. Mary A. KirbyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
- United States v. Harry R. CarboniCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Steven D. BrawnerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- United States v. SextonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
- United States v. Oscar FloresCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- United States v. PhamCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- United States v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
- United States v. GrayCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.