United States v. Danny Lee Wey

How courts have described this case

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

• “it may be that the defendant’s consent could authorize the judge to designate a magistrate, under 28 U. S. C. § 636(b)(3), to preside over jury selection”
• jury selection by magistrate is not plain error where no prejudice is shown
• courts may commit error and even violate the Constitution, but this does result in the loss of subject matter jurisdiction
• when district court enters judgment, question of whether parties consented to proceed before magistrate judge does not affect the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, but is merely a procedural question
• jury selection by magistrate is not plain error where no prejudice is shown
• criticizing France’s approach to Gomez

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).