United States v. Hoyte

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that undisclosed evidence that could have been used only to further impeach an already-impeached Government witness did not require a new trial
• observing that a defendant chal- lenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction bears \a heavy burden\
• agreeing with the trial court that undisclosed statements “would not have changed the trial’s outcome because [the witness] was impeached in so many other ways”
• agreeing with the trial court that undisclosed statements “would not have changed the trial’s outcome because [the witness] was impeached in so many other ways”
• finding no abuse of discretion where replacement counsel was notified of his appointment to represent the defendant less than a month before the trial was scheduled to begin
• providing stan- dard of review

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named United States v. Hoyte

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• United States v. Hoyte
  Second Circuit· 2009-05-27· cited 1×
• United States v. Hoyte
  Second Circuit· 2009-05-27