United States v. Gerald Lee Puckett, Whit Yancey Mauzy, Jr., and Kevin Barry Krown

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “unrelated and dissimilar” conduct by a third party to con someone else “was properly excluded as irrelevant” to corroborate the defendant’s testimony that he had been conned by the same person
• electing to “adhere to the same evidence test” though the defendant “urge[d]” the panel “to employ the ‘totality of the circumstances’ test”
• upholding exclusion of a defendant’s evidence that other people had been defrauded by a codefendant because the other fraud was too dissimilar
• noting “a time period 31 overlap between the two indictments” before nevertheless concluding that the defendant had “failed to establish the existence of a single conspiracy encompassing both the Oklahoma and Colorado charges”
• “[W]e recognize that it has been criticized in recent years as an inadequate measurement of double jeopardy when applied to multiple prosecutions for conspiracy charges.”
• El tribunal determinó que se tardaron en citar al testigo a sólo dos semanas antes del juicio, por lo que no era un testigo no disponible.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).