|
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JESSICA OLSEN, Defendant-Appellant. |
|
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Michigan at Marquette.
No. 02-00004-001—R. Allan Edgar, District Judge.
Argued: July 25, 2008
Decided and Filed: August 14, 2008
Before: COLE and CLAY, Circuit Judges; RUSSELL, District Judge.
CLAY, Circuit Judge. Defendant, Jessica Olsen, appeals from an order entered by the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan sentencing her to 41 months of imprisonment and two years of supervised release for possession with intent to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(D). Specifically, Olsen contends that the district court erred in calculating the drug quantity attributable to her for purposes of establishing her base offense level. For the reasons that follow, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court.
|
In re: BRICE ROAD DEVELOPMENTS, L.L.C., Debtor. __________________________________________ GENERAL ELECTRIC CREDIT EQUITIES, INC., Appellant, v. BRICE ROAD DEVELOPMENTS, L.L.C. and SIR KENSINGTON ASSOCIATES, LLC, Appellees. |
|
Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court
for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division.
Case No. 05-66007.
Argued: May 13, 2008
Decided and Filed: August 14, 2008
Before: GREGG, PARSONS, and SCOTT, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Judges.
MARCIA PHILLIPS PARSONS, Chief Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Judge. General Electric Credit Equities, Inc. (“GE”) appeals an order of the bankruptcy court confirming the chapter 11 reorganization plan of Brice Road Developments, L.L.C. (“Debtor”). GE objected to confirmation of the plan on the basis that the plan was not feasible as required by 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(11) and the plan was not fair and equitable as required by 11 U.S.C. § 1129(b)(2) because it provided for an improper interest rate on GE’s secured claim, undervalued GE’s collateral, and failed to accord GE its rights as an electing secured creditor under 11 U.S.C. § 1111(b)(2).1 For the reasons that follow, we affirm the bankruptcy court in all respects, with the exception of the conclusion that the plan accords GE the full rights of an electing § 1111(b) secured creditor. On this issue, this case will be remanded for further action by the bankruptcy court.