United States v. Jaime Leon Gomez-Norena

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a party fails to undermine our confidence in the verdict preserve an issue for appeal by making from a substantive or impeachment an incorrect specific objection
• holding that “a party fails to preserve an evidentiary issue for appeal not only by failing to make a specific objection, but also by making the wrong specific objection.”
• holding that it was not plain error for the district court to admit an expert’s testimony that it was his “opinion” that “approximately $200,000 worth of cocaine” was “possess[ed] with intent to distribute” and not for “personal use”
• holding that unpreserved evidentiary objections are reviewed for plain error
• explaining that plain error review applies when a party fails to object below
• finding no plain error when the court twice cautioned the jury to consider the profile testimony only as background material

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).