United States v. Barnhart

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 judge’s improper questioning of a witness did not prejudice the defendant under the plain-error stand- ard because the evidence pointed strongly to the defendant’s guilt
• holding that although the judge’s questioning witnesses constituted error, that error did not affect the defendant’s substantial rights, because he failed to show that “but for the judge’s improper questioning, he probably would not have been convicted”
• noting that such an instruction “limits the degree of influence the questions might otherwise have on the jury’s deliberations and may permit a conclusion that the judge’s error was not prejudicial”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).