United States v. Keith Mathis

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a “slightly darker” background “did not significantly contribute to the array’s unnecessary suggestiveness”
• stating that the “fit” requirement means the “scientific technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue.”
• finding admission of eleven uncharged robberies in a case seeking conviction of only one did not amount to an abuse of discretion under Rule 403
• finding no abuse of discretion for admitting testimony when the court instructed the jury on the permissible uses of that testimony and the testimony “was properly challengeable, and was in fact challenged, by vigorous cross-examination”
• in context of record as a whole, excluded testimony was highly unlikely to have caused a different result
• “[W]e may be firmly convinced that the error was harmless without disproving every ‘reasonable possibility’ of prejudice.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).