Legal Opinion

United States v. Manatau

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided August 1, 2011No. 10-4101PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GORSUCH, Circuit Judge.

When calculating an advisory guidelines sentence for an economic crime a district court naturally must take account of the losses the defendant caused others. But the guidelines instruct that, when fashioning a sentence, a court should also account for the losses the defendant “intended” but was unable to realize. The question we face in this case is what counts as an “intended” loss? Unsurprisingly, we hold that the term means exactly what it says: to be included in an advisory guidelines calculation the intended loss must have been an object of the defendant’s purpose.

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  2. Russello v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Tison v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. Smith v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Bishop v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
  2. Secsys, LLC v. VigilCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2012
  3. United States v. Timothy HortonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2012
  4. United States v. O'ConnorCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017
  5. United States v. Cora Cadia FordCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2015

33 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