The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Brady, 928 F.2d 844 (9th Cir. 1991):
1 In footnote 11, the majority attempts to distinguish United States v. Fonner, 920 F.2d 1330 (7th Cir.1990), and United States v. Isom, 886 F.2d 736 (4th Cir.1990), by arguing that in these cases "the district court relied on undisputed facts, not on facts rejected by a jury's not guilty verdict." This narrow reading ignores the reasoning underlying both opinions. Both cases explicitly endorse this dissent's position that because of different standards of proof, conduct not resulting in a guilty verdict may be used to enhance a sentence.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.