Christopher Lee Richter v. Jaime Kathrann Richter

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that we “lack[ed] jurisdiction to review the district court’s dismissal of [a defendant’s] § 2255 motion” when he “did not timely file a notice of appeal”
• holding that plain-error review “requires the court to find that the error was plain under existing law, rather than subject to reasonable dispute”
• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the testimony of an expert who did not demonstrate “particular expertise in the field of false confessions”
• affirming a district court’s finding that a juror was not impermissibly biased despite “several inappropriate racial and religious comments” made by the juror during deliberations
• upholding district court’s finding that 8 juror’s comments did not indicate actual racial or ethnic bias
• describing circumstances in which a description of past intent could also be understood as communicating present intent

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).