Matter of Laura E. v. Matthew E.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a similar instruction left the jury with a constitutionally accurate impression of the government’s burden of proof
• explaining that Nevada’s reasonable 18 doubt instruction did not violate constitutional principles
• “[D]oubt to be reasonable must be actual and 27 substantial, not mere possibility or speculation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).