Turner v. Weinberger

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the inscription of “Garnika, Spain” on firearm could be used to show its manufacture in Spain
• “The Supreme Court in Taylor held that ... [an] enhancement was appropriate if the charging paper and jury instructions required the jury to find the elements of generic burglary.” (emphasis added)
• “An inscription placed on a firearm by the manufacturer is ... a mechanical trace and not a statement for purposes of [Rule 801(c) (definition of hearsay) ]”.
• ʺAn inscription placed on a - 28 - firearm by the manufacturer is similarly a mechanical trace and not a statement for purposes of Federal Rule of Evidence 801(c).ʺ
• the same in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).