United States v. Chang Guo You, United States of America v. Mi Ae Yim, AKA Mi Ae Pigman

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “lack[ing] sufficient age and maturity level,” and lack of “appropriate intellect or sophistication” were “valid and non-discriminatory” reasons for exercising peremptory challenges
• finding the district court did not err when it declined to add a word to a jury instruction because it would create a redundancy
• “The court instructed the jury that it must find that Appellants had acted with ‘the purpose of avoiding [the aliens'] detection by immigration authorities.’ This instruction is synonymous with having acted with necessary intent as required in Barajas-Montiel and Nguyen.”
• “The court instructed the jury that it must find that Appellants had acted with ‘the purpose of avoiding [the aliens'] detection by immigration authorities.’ This instruction is synonymous with having acted with necessary intent as required in Barajas-Montiel and Nguyen.”
• “The court instructed the jury that it must find that Appellants had acted with ‘the purpose of avoiding [the aliens'] detection by immigration authorities.’ This instruction is synonymous with having acted with necessary intent as required in Barajas-Montiel and Nguyen.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).