Citation network
United States Vs. Watts
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 06, 1997
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 148 (1997) October Term, 1996 Syllabus United States V. WattsSearch
-
the Guidelines, and this Court's double jeopardy decisions, particularly Witte v. UnitedSearch
-
the Government from relitigating an issue in a subsequent action governed by a lower standard of proof. Dowling v. UnitedSearch
-
Together with United States v. PutraSearch
-
courts could not consider conduct of the defendants underlying charges of which they had been acquitted. United States v. WattsSearch
-
United States v. PutraSearch
-
the Sentencing Guidelines, and this Court's decisions, particularly Witte v. UnitedSearch
-
A jury convicted Watts of possessing cocaine base with intent to distribute, in violation of 1 United States v. BoneySearch
-
United States v. MocciolaSearch
-
F.2d 13 , 16-17 (CA1 1989) (criticized in dicta in United States v. LanoueSearch
-
United States v. Rodriguez-GonzalezSearch
-
United States v. IsomSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
United States v. Juarez-OrtegaSearch
-
United States v. MiltonSearch
-
United States v. FonnerSearch
-
United States v. DawnSearch
-
United States v. AveriSearch
-
F. 3d, at 797 (quoting United States v. BradySearch
-
F.2d 844 , 851, and n. 12 (CA9 1991), abrogated on other grounds, Nichols v. UnitedSearch
-
We reiterated this principle in Williams v. NewSearch
-
United States v. DonelsonSearch
-
Witte, supra, at 402 (quoting United States v. WrightSearch
-
United States v. EbboleSearch
-
United States v. OneSearch
-
Dowling v. UnitedSearch
-
we have held that application of the preponderance standard at sentencing generally satisfies due process. McMillan v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
Kinder v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. KikumuraSearch
-
United States v. GiganteSearch
-
United States v. LombardSearch
-
see also United States v. TownleySearch
-
United States v. RestrepoSearch
-
United States v. LamSearch
-
United States v. TrujilloSearch
-
F.2d 1377 , 1382 (CA7) (same), cert. denied, 506 U. S. 897 (1992). But see United States v. WashingtonSearch
-
Burns v. UnitedSearch
-
impersonal interest in uniformity and retribution.1 Strict mandatory rules have dramatically 1 Compare Williams v. NewSearch
-
Mistretta v. UnitedSearch
-
hardship, drug or alcohol dependence, or lack of guidance as a youth in making certain sentencing decisions. See Koon v. UnitedSearch
-
not guilty of participating in a similar transaction involving five ounces of cocaine on May 9, 1992. United States v. PutraSearch
-
c), but was found guilty of certain drug crimes. United States v. WattsSearch
-
the application of a preponderance of the evidence standard to so-called relevant conduct. See, e. g., United States v. SilvermanSearch
-
United States v. ConcepcionSearch
-
United States v. GallowaySearch
-
id., at 664 (Norris, J., dissenting, joined by Hug, J., Pregerson, J., and D. W. Nelson, J.). Cf. United States v. LanoueSearch
-
Syllabus United States V. WattsSearch
-
Witte v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial