United States v. Jimmy Dewitt Webster, Sr., Candido Daniel Santiago, Barry Weinreich, Joe Buhajla, Arthur Byron Murphy, and Clarence Royalston

How courts have described this case

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

• implying that intervening circumstances that might purge taint include ability to contact family or friends and appearance before a magistrate
• “[W]e have distinguished between jury panels tainted by outside influence, such as publicity or direct appeals from third parties, and panels on which one or more of the jurors themselves have violated an instruction of the court.”
• analyzing United States v. Rubin, 474 F.2d 262 (3d Cir.
• “We are reluctant to adopt a [presumption of prejudice] rule that would unduly bridle the discretion of district judges who, as we are ever mindful, are obviously in a far better position from which to control the flow of trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).