United States v. Barry Rinn and Alex Selva

How courts have described this case

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

• analyzing under Rule 16(a)(1)(A) the government’s failure to disclose the defendant’s statement to an undercover state police officer and holding that there was no violation, but only because the defendant’s statement was not in response to “interrogation”
• local police officers cooperating in a joint investi- gation financed by the Drug Enforcement Agency
• district court did not err when it submitted tape recordings and government’s prepared transcripts thereof to jury, subject to instruction that transcripts were only to be used as an aid to following the tapes, and tape recordings, not transcripts, controlled

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).