United States v. Ashley Andrews

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 trial evidence sufficiently demonstrated the defendant’s intent to have a public official influence government action under § 666
• finding that an error affects substantial rights if the error affects the outcome of the district court proceedings
• comparing excusing forfeiture for failing to raise an issue in an opening brief to plain error review
• affirming conviction under Section 666 for accepting bribes in connection with the award of a government contract
• upholding conviction even where “the District Court [incorrectly] referred to ‘honest services’ on several occasions in its final instructions,” because the erroneous term was not “interwoven throughout the jury charge.”
• upholding conviction even where “the District Court [incorrectly] referred to ‘honest services’ on several occasions in its final instructions,” because the erroneous term was not “interwoven throughout the jury charge.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).