United States v. Jerry Kerley

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that lay witnesses may testify in response to hypothetical questions based on their “particularized knowledge” of an organization’s “policies, practices, or procedures”
• finding no violation of a right to present a defense when the evidence was inadmissible hearsay
• permitting lay opinion testimony about business practices “if the witness’s testimony derived from personal knowledge gained through participation in the business’s day-to- day affairs”
• “[Defendant] briefly raises the argument, but fails to develop it in any meaningful way. Therefore, we need not consider the issue because [Defendant] has forfeited it.”
• “Lay testimony results from a process of reasoning familiar in everyday life, whereas an expert’s testimony results from a process of reasoning which can be mastered only by specialists in the field.”
• chart summarizing thousands of pages of evidence on eight separate real-estate transactions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).