Object-offense penalty incorporation

AND · 21usc846:penalty

Consequence after offense proof, not a universal extra liability conjunct. The 1988 amendment replaced the earlier maximum-only formula. Use current object-offense penalty law and offense-date rules; this node supplies no blanket quantity-attribution rule.

Exact element source

shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.
Source: docroot/ir/usc/title21.jsonl#title21_sec846; Unicode character offsets [115:259] (end exclusive); SHA-256 2e517c5d16d23f29a12a2ee674170178c593255445eb2bf7e8f112f4236ea1e1.

All variants

Recorded DB variant labels, including zero-count variants
VariantDescriptionMerits instance blocksDistinct casesExample cases (up to 3 per group)
sentencing/relevant-conduct-different-drug0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 1		0No counted merits examples

Excluded context examples: /f3d/935/0527-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — background/procedural

How courts decided this element

Annotation blocks, including explicitly excluded context
CaseElementHolding and scopeVariantExact source quotations
/f3d/935/0527-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019Object-offense penalty incorporationnot_reached
Excluded from merits counts
background / procedural

The appellate dispute is Guidelines relevant conduct following a plea, not the statutory same-penalties provision or proof of conspiracy elements.		sentencing/relevant-conduct-different-drug
The district court applied a two-level sentencing enhancement because McCloud carried a firearm during an attempt to buy marijuana during the course of the conspiracy.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_935.jsonl#/f3d/935/0527-01; Unicode character offsets [226:393] (end exclusive); SHA-256 abbba66e24a03cb05607679cbf5e38041633615a41be08ece5c8117b8f69ba7d.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_935.jsonl#/f3d/935/0527-01; Unicode character offsets [747:825] (end exclusive); SHA-256 abbba66e24a03cb05607679cbf5e38041633615a41be08ece5c8117b8f69ba7d.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Court interpretations