Banzhoff v. Dauphin County Board of Assessment Appeals

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019), “has no bearing on [18 U.S.C.] § 922(d)”
• stating limiting instructions “are generally sufficient to cure any risk of prejudice” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• ‘‘substantial evidence of jury misconduct . . . [is required] [before] a district court may, within its sound discretion, investigate the allegations through juror questioning’’ (internal quota- tion marks omitted)
• “[S]uch discretion is con- strued especially broadly in the context of Rule 403.”
• describing the elements of conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).