United States of America, Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Mohammad Ajmal, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee, Muhammad Afzal and Hassan Sabghat Ullahkhan

How courts have described this case

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

• holding, in an egregious case, that the district court abused its discretion by repeatedly encouraging jurors to pose questions to witnesses, including the defendant, thereby “altering the role of the jury from neutral fact-finder to inquisitor and advocate”
• “The fact that review is discretionary does not bar presentation of 10 appellants’ federal claims—appellants can raise the claims in a petition for review.”
• extraordinary 8 circumstances exception did not apply where plaintiff argued that California Supreme Court 9 justices and Bar Court judges are biased and the attorney discipline system is unconstitutional

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).