Teoume-Lessane v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that Portuondo overruled this court’s previous determination in Jenkins v. United States, 374 A.2d 581 (D.C. 1977
• concluding that “Jenkins, in its reliance on Griffin, was a constitutional decision that has now been overruled by the United States Supreme Court in Portuondo and therefore is no longer binding on this court”
• rejecting appellant‘s claim that statutory interpretation issues must always be reviewed de novo because ―even the paradigmatic legal question of a statute‘s constitutionality, raised for the first time on appeal, is subject to plain error review‖
• We can say, “with fair assurance, after pondering all that happened without stripping [any] erroneous action from the whole, that the judgment was not substantially swayed by [any] error.”
• “[Defense’s questions had attempted to create the impression that the FBI’s testing had been selectively performed to skew the results by focusing only on the items most damaging to appellant, while ignoring items that could have helped to exculpate him.”
• “[T]he defense’s questions had attempted to create the impression that the FBI’s testing had been selectively performed to skew the results by focusing only on the items most damaging to appellant,' while ignoring items that could have helped to exculpate him.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).