Suydam v. Day

How courts have described this case

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

• first quoting United States v. Valentine, 820 F.2d 565, 570 (2d Cir. 1987), and then quoting United States v. Rosa, 17 F.3d 1531, 1549 (2d Cir. 1994)
• “As we explained in United States v. Bakhtiar, 994 F.2d 970 (2d Cir.1993), a case which also involved a government loss of tapes, a due process claim arising in these circumstances should be treated as a claim for loss or destruction of evidence rather than as a Brady claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).