United States v. Jorge Cornell

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that jury instruction was not coercive when jury deliberated for three hours after the Allen charge before reaching a verdict
• “Waucaush is not the law in this Circuit and we have doubts about its validity, particularly in light of Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 125 S.Ct. 2195, 162 L.Ed.2d 1 (2005
• admission of evidence over Rule 901 objection was not abuse of discretion
• “to secure a conviction for RICO conspiracy, the government is not required to allege or prove the actual completion of a single racketeering act by the defendant or any other member of the conspiracy”
• “To the extent Defendants argue that the district court was required to charge the jury that it had to unanimously agree on the specific racketeering acts that the conspirators engaged in during the conspiracy, such a claim cannot succeed.”
• “To the extent Defendants argue that the district court - 49 - No. 1-18-1933 was required to charge the jury that it had to unanimously agree on the specific racketeering acts that the conspirators engaged in during the conspiracy, such a claim cannot succeed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).