MacGregor v. State Mut. Life Assur. Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that joinder is improper where one criminal activity did not naturally flow from the separate criminal conduct
• concluding that limiting instructions effectively cured any risk of unfair prejudice presented by a joint trial
• holding that the district court “adequately dispelled any prejudice by telling the jurors in open court that the [perceived threat] was a prank, and by individually questioning the jurors to make sure that they could proceed impartially”
• stating \the defendants fail to show that they were prejudiced because the district court sustained the defendant's objection and struck the answer\
• reserving the question of whether the sufficiency of evidence in an initial mistrial is reviewable on appeal from conviction at second trial
• “Given that the district court sustained the objection, coupled with the district court’s earlier instruction to the jury ..., if there was any error, it was harmless.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).