UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raul PADILLA-MENDOZA, Defendant-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the district court abused its discretion in improperly excluding two jurors but error did not require reversal
• discussing United States 11 v. Salamone, 800 F.2d 1216, 1226-28 (3d Cir. 1986)
• “The core question here is whether defendant’s constitutional right to an impartial jury has been violated.”
• confession obtained 8 hours after arrest held reasonable absent evidence of deliberate attempt to delay
• “We review a district court’s finding that a pre-arraignment delay was reasonable for clear error.”
• “We will admit a statement made outside of the safe harbor if the delay was reasonable or if public pol- icy concerns weigh in favor of admission.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).