Stanley v. Mukasey

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that an error was harmless in part be- cause the “trial counsel did not refer to the objectionable ev- idence in his argument”
• concluding that an error was harmless in part be- cause the “trial counsel did not refer to the objectionable ev- idence in his argument”
• considering appellant’s “weak” theory of the case and “implausible” suggestion that the Army investigator’s confidential informant planted evidence on him in determining harmlessness
• finding harm- less error in part because the “trial counsel did not refer to the objectionable evidence in his argument”
• find- ing harmless error in part because the “trial counsel did not refer to the objectionable evidence in his argument”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).