The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Gavilan, 966 F.2d 530 (9th Cir. 1992):
We were presented with a similar argument in United States v. Willard, 919 F.2d 606 (9th Cir.1990), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 208, 116 L.Ed.2d 167 (1991). In Willard, the defendant argued that the district court's enhancement of his drug sentence for gun possession was improper, because the guns were seized from his place of business and were not present at the scene of his offense. Id. at 609. In rejecting this contention, we stated:
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.