United States v. Lam Kwong-Wah, United States of America v. Lam Kwong-Wah, United States of America v. Lam Kwong-Wah

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that defendant who did nothing himself in venue district may nevertheless be held to account there if he aided and abetted confederates’ acts in district
• \No distinction is made between direct and circumstantial evidence in evaluating the sufficiency of evidence supporting a guilty verdict.\
• no error in finding by trial judge that Jencks Act material was \insignificant\ to the defendant's defense and \would not have benefited him\
• no error in finding by trial judge that Jencks Act material was “insignificant” to the defendant’s defense and “would not have benefited him”
• “No distinction is made between direct and circumstantial evidence in evaluating the sufficiency of evidence supporting a guilty verdict.”
• “It seems clear that, under the amended Guidelines, scienter is not required as a general matter.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).