United States v. James C. Hastings

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, although the government's improper refusal to comply with a discovery order warranted sanctions, dismissal of the indictment was \an extreme and inappropriate sanction\ where the only prejudice to defendant was \inconvenience and slight expense of delays\
• holding that, although the government's improper refusal to comply with a discovery order war- ranted sanctions, dismissal of the indictment was\an extreme and inappropriate sanction\ where the only prejudice to defendant was \inconvenience and slight expense of delays\
• holding that, although the government’s improper refusal to comply with a discovery order warranted sanctions, dismissal of the indictment was “an extreme and inappropriate sanction” where the only prejudice to defendant was “inconvenience and slight expense of delays”
• stating that the court of appeals should not consider evidence that was not presented to the district court
• stating that the court of appeals should not con- sider evidence that was not presented to the district court
• stating that “we will not impute the unlawful biases of the investigating agents to the persons ultimately responsible for the prosecution”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).