United States v. James Harold Woods, A/K/A Fats Woods

How courts have described this case

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

• when prosecutor asked witness whether he was under indictment by prosecutor's office, prosecutor acted improperly by \inject[ing] into the trial prejudicial matter which is obviously not admissible\
• when prosecutor asked witness whether he was under indictment by prosecutor’s office, prosecutor acted improperly by ‘‘inject[ing] into the trial prejudicial matter which is obviously not admissible’’
• cross-examination although improper under section 5.6(b) not prejudicial
• assuming without deciding error and finding no prejudice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).