In the Interest Of: K. D. M., a Child (Mother)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the testimony of a probation officer, arresting officer, jailer, and the defendant, along with a positive field test was sufficient to prove by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant had violated his supervised release
• stating that the district court did not clearly err when it relied on a field test, witness testimony, and the defendant’s evasiveness as evidence of a violation of supervised release
• “[A] district court’s assessment of a witness’s credibility is almost never clear error given that court’s comparative advantage at evaluating credibility.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).