United States v. Christopher Barnes

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that any error in the denial of a bill of particulars was harmless where the defendant could not demonstrate that he was taken by surprise by the evidence presented at trial and that such surprise prejudiced his defense
• noting that appellate courts are “ill-suited to second-guess” strategic decisions by trial counsel “unless there is no strategic or tactical justification for the course taken”
• applying Orozco-Prada analysis based on amount of drugs attributable to each defendant
• applying Orozco-Prada analysis based on amount of drugs attributable to each defendant
• “Normally, we will not consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief, let alone at or after oral argument.”
• “[I]t is ‘the government’s responsibility to seek special verdicts.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).