Ankenbrand v. City of New York

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that witness’s testimony suggested confusion, not deliberate falsehoods, and explaining that defendant had adequate opportunity on cross-examination to expose any falsehood
• affirming denial of safety valve because evidence “casted doubt” on defendant’s statement to investigators that he had not sold drugs before the instant offense
• “[W]e afford great deference to the jury’s factual findings and credibility determinations.”
• reviewing jury instruction for abuse of discretion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).