United States v. Cadet

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “erroneous evidentiary rulings entitle a defendant to a new trial, unless the error was harmless”
• presuming jury 21 followed limiting instruction that 404(b) evidence could not be used for purpose other than establishing defendant’s knowledge and intent
• listing \corroboration of witnesses\ as one of the acceptable \non- propensity purposes\ for admitting other act evidence under Rule 404(b)
• “[A] sentence that exceeds the statutory maximum qualifies as plain error.”
• “[A] sentence that exceeds the statutory maximum qualifies as plain error.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).