United States v. Edward Harold Corey

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “[b]road, vague questions of the venire” are not enough to prove the impartiality of a juror indicating actual prejudice
• noting that “[b]road, vague questions of the venire” are not enough to prove the impartiality of a juror indicating actual prejudice
• “Once a party has raised the spectre of potential actual prejudice, specific and direct questioning is necessary to ferret out those jurors who would not be impartial. Broad, vague questions of the venire will not suffice.”
• “Once a party has raised the spectre of potential actual prejudice, specific and direct questioning is necessary to ferret out those jurors who would not be impartial. Broad, vague questions of the venire will not suffice.”
• “Once a party has raised the spectre of potential actual prejudice, specific and direct questioning is necessary to ferret out those jurors who would not be impartial. Broad, vague questions of the venire will not suffice.”
• “Once a party has raised the spectre of potential actual prejudice, specific and direct questioning is necessary to ferret out those jurors who would not be impartial. Broad, vague questions of the venire will not suf- fice.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).