Dale v. Crews

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that drug quantity was an “essential fact” that had to be included in indictment, but reviewing indictment’s deficiency under a plain error standard
• noting that the sufficiency standard of review is “exceedingly deferential” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• upholding admission of evidence of defendants’ previous participation in drug trafficking operation “as probative evidence of defendants’ knowledge of the charged drug-[related acts], [and] their intent to engage in these acts”
• admitting evidence of defendants’ participation in drug trafficking operation “as probative evidence of defendants’ knowledge of the charged drug- and murder-related acts, their intent to engage in these acts, and the development of their relationships with each other”
• “We review a challenge based on a factually deficient indictment and raised for the first time on appeal under the plain error standard.”
• “There was no undue prejudice because the [prior] acts did not involve conduct more serious than the crimes charged . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).