United States v. Bahman Mansoori, Mark Cox, Mohammad Mansoori, Kenneth Choice, and Terry Young

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a witness who heard defendants’ voices once during a 22 Nos. 06-1754, 06-2380 & 06-2821 court proceeding satisfied the “minimal familiarity” requirement
• recognizing a reduced potential for prejudice where the government structures testimony “in such a way as to make clear when the witness is testifying to facts and when he is offering his opinion as an expert”
• noting that “in some cases, the evidence may leave no doubt that the defendant directed another culpable participant but may not reveal that person’s name” and citing cases
• recognizing a reduced potential for prejudice where the government structures testimony “in such a way as to make clear when the witness is testifying to facts and when he is offering his opinion as an expert”
• explaining that community restitution cannot be imposed unless defendant also is fined
• discussing the erroneous life sentences imposed as to Young and Choice on the distribution charge set forth in Count Two

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).