United States v. Barrett James

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that using a criminal jury’s answers to special interrogatories in order to resolve ambiguities in the general verdict “would constitute a manifest invasion of the jury’s exclusive deliberative function in arriving at a verdict”
• distinguishing special interrogatories seeking to explain the general verdict from special interrogatories being used “to assist in sentencing”
• “sharply contrast[ing]” use of special interrogatories “to assist in sentencing” with their impermissible use “to clarify an ambiguous verdict”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named United States v. Barrett James

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• United States v. Barrett (James)
  Third Circuit· 1991-02-06
• United States v. Barrett (James)
  Third Circuit· 1992-01-16