United States v. Charles S. Ronder

How courts have described this case

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

• instructing that it may be appropriate in some circumstances to disclose a jury note to counsel in camera “or even to make some redaction”
• noting in 15 the context of jury notes that “counsel should be afforded an opportunity to be 16 heard before the trial judge responds.”
• telling jury, “You have a right ... to stand on your own independent conviction,” not sufficient to balance out supplementary instruction on importance of reaching verdict
• “Had the first note been discussed with counsel, the [unbalanced] phrases in the response ... might well have been avoided.... ”
• “[i]t is settled law that messages from a jury should be disclosed to counsel and that counsel should be afforded an opportunity to be heard before the trial judge responds”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).