United States v. Dowlin

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the jury could have found that the defendant participated in a fraudulent scheme, where the evidence suggested that she knew the purpose of the scheme and willingly participated
• recognizing that “the right to present defense witnesses is not absolute,” as the accused “must abide [by] the rules of evidence and procedure, including standards of relevance and materiality” (quotations omitted)
• noting that a defendant seeking continuance to obtain witness testimony must show “who the witness was, what his testimony would be, and that the testimony would be competent and relevant”
• explaining that a party’s failure to meet one prong of the test is a sufficient reason not to notice plain error
• upholding a securities-fraud conviction under the aiding-and-abetting statute based on the defendant’s “willing and knowing involvement in [the] fraudulent ventures”
• finding the fourth plain-error prong not met even though the sentence was at the bottom of the range

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).