United States v. Amiel Cueto

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the defendants had ample opportunity to demonstrate lack of credibility and therefore the district court's limitation on cross-examination did not implicate the Sixth Amendment
• recognizing importance of distinguishing good faith advocacy from criminal conduct in applying section 1503
• explaining that it was reasonable to conclude from .this evidence that the attorney-client representation was “undertaken for a criminal purpose,” and that the attorney had “agreed to participate in th[e] scheme for his personal financial gain”
• “[A]n individual’s status as an attorney engaged in litigation-related conduct does not provide protection from prosecution for criminal conduct.”
• hold- ing that the defendants had ample opportunity to demon- strate lack of credibility and therefore the district court’s limitation on cross-examination did not implicate the Sixth Amendment
• “ ‘Correct application of Section 1503 thus requires, in a very real sense that the factfin-der discern — by direct evidence or from inference — the motive which led an individual to perform particular actions....’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).