United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Jim Gee and William C. Norris, Defendants-Appellants/cross-Appellees

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that there was no basis to reverse the jury’s finding where standardized transactions occurred over thirteen months
• holding that the dis- trict court plainly erred and “should have sua sponte included a buyer- seller instruction because it knew that the conspiracy evidence was weak”
• holding that the dis- trict court plainly erred and “should have sua sponte included a buyer- seller instruction because it knew that the conspiracy evidence was weak”
• holding that the dis- trict court plainly erred and “should have sua sponte included a buyer- seller instruction because it knew that the conspiracy evidence was weak”
• finding that the jury had sufficient evidence to convict on the conspiracy charge, but reversing for failure to give a buyer-seller instruction
• finding that the jury had sufficient evidence to convict on the conspiracy charge, but reversing for failure to give a buyer-seller instruction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).