United States v. Douglas Fred Dorsey

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that decision of district court to exclude expert testimony was proper despite failure of district court to conduct analysis of reliability and relevance required by Rule 702
• concluding that decision of district court to exclude expert testimony was proper despite failure of district court to conduct analysis of reliability and relevance required by Rule 702
• holding that \an appellate court can affirm a trial court's opinion on different grounds than those employed by the trial court\
• recognizing that a jury’s willingness to acquit a defendant on some counts is “strong evidence that the district court’s denial of his motion for mistrial did not result in the type of prejudice that warrants reversal”
• explaining that because the government did not purposely introduce the inadmissible evidence, it “did not amount to governmental misconduct of the type that warrants mistrial”
• observing that the likelihood of prejudice is diminished where a statement is not purposefully introduced by the government

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).