United States v. Edwin A. Towne, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the plain language of the Federal Armed Career Criminal Act “arguably support[ed]” the trial court’s “literal construction” of it as requiring the court to count the defendant’s total number of convictions
• declining to adopt the trial court’s “literal construction” of the Federal Armed Career Criminal Act because doing so “would thwart the clear legislative goals underlying the [Act]”
• finding no error in admission of evidence regarding the defendant’s possession of a firearm on days other than the single date charged in the indictment because it constituted direct evidence of the charged crime
• “Since appellant has in no way established the partiality of the jury that ultimately convicted him, he may not successfully claim deprivation of his sixth amendment or due process rights.”
• “Since appellant has in no way established the partiality of the jury that ultimately convicted him, he may not successfully claim deprivation of his sixth amendment or due process rights.”
• “[A]ppellant cannot demonstrate that he was prejudiced by the trial judge’s refusal to excuse this venireperson for cause, since Ms. Cox was never a member of the jury that convicted [Appellant].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).