Custis v. Clarke

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that trial court inquiring into claim of extraneous prejudicial information under Rule 606(b) “properly refused to consider statements by the jurors as to what may have influenced their deliberations”
• rejecting an inference of extraneous influence as insufficient

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).