United States v. Baltazar Saenz

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the court is particularly sensitive to a trial judge’s questioning of a defendant
• stating that a district court errs when the cumulative effect of its comments is “substantial” and “prejudice[s] the defendant’s case” (citation omitted)
• noting that federal trial judge may question witnesses to elicit or clarify facts without falling afoul of due process so long as judge’s behavior does not confuse the functions of judge and prosecutor
• noting that federal trial judge may question witnesses to elicit or clarify facts without falling afoul of due process so long as judge’s behavior does not confuse the functions of judge and prosecutor
• analyzing a claim of judicial misconduct under FRE 614, which is identical to MRE 614
• district judge’s involvement was prejudicial where there was “relatively scant evidence against [the defendant]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).