UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Harold S. McCLINTOCK, Defendant-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that confinement imposed for substantive probation violations is “confinement” for the original offense within the meaning of 609(b)
• relying on the trial court’s appraisal of the circumstances and holding that the finding of unanimity was not in error
• holding improperly admitted expert testimony harmless because there was substantial admissible evidence
• approving warrant containing the language “any and all items referring to the sale of diamonds and other gemstones which are evidence of a violation of Title VIII”
• approving warrant containing the language \any and all items referring to the sale of diamonds and other gemstones which are evidence of a violation of Title XVIII\
• reports prepared by gemstone experts were inadmissable because the preparers of the reports did not testify and were not shown to be unavailable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).