United States v. Cloud

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the denial of a Fed. R. Crim. P. 29 motion is reviewed de novo
• holding “payments to recruiters, buyers, and other coconspirators for the role each person played in the mortgage fraud scheme” were essential expenses of the underlying fraud
• explaining that an error in admitting evidence is harmless if the court can “say with fair assurance, after pondering all that happened without stripping the erroneous action from the whole, that the judgment was not substantially swayed by the error”
• finding no merger problem between money laundering conspiracy conviction and a mortgage fraud conspiracy conviction because the former “was not tied to any specific payment to a recruiter, buyer, or coconspirator”
• “evidentiary rulings are subject to harmless error review”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).