United States v. James Fulford

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that trial court “did not commit reversible error by failing to rescue Fulford from his questionable strategy of introducing such tangential evidence”
• holding that a party who introduces testimony cannot later claim that such testimony is irrelevant and prejudicial
• applying harmless error analysis in this context

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).