# United States v. Cook

> Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · July 20, 1999 · 181 F.3d 1232

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9415488

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Anthony COOK, Defendant-Appellant; United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adrell Forthenberry, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
- **Decided:** July 20, 1999
- **Citations:** 181 F.3d 1232; 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 16690; 1999 WL 509836
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Anderson
- **Judges:** Anderson, Hill, Cook
- **Cited by:** 28 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9415488

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that reasonable foreseeability provision of § lB1.3(a)(l)(B) does not apply to § 3C1.2 adjustment for reckless endangerment

## Opinion text

ANDERSON, Chief Judge,
concurs specially.
ANDERSON, Chief Judge, concurring specially:
I concur in the result only. Because the district court was clearly erroneous in finding that the high speed chase was reasonably foreseeable, it is not necessary to address the difficult question of law which the majority resolves.
In this case, the government conceded at oral argument that both defendants got out of the car as soon as there was any forewarning of a high speed chase. Thus, any inference that a high speed chase was reasonably foreseeable was removed by the evidence in this case.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9415488. Public record. Not legal advice.