United States v. Law

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Confrontation Clause was not violated where the expert witness “did not relate statements by out-of-court declar-ants to the jury,” but based his conclusion on his experience as a narcotics investigator
• noting that transactions engaged in for present personal benefit and not to create appearance of legitimate wealth generally do not violate money laundering statutes
• explaining that the Government could satisfy its burden of proving a conviction by producing the Judgment and Commitment Order
• holding government officials may rely on assurance of authority to consent to search “if objective circumstances make reliance reasonable”
• observing that the district court had applied the four-level enhancement at the original sentencing
• observing that a defendant has the right to appear at an evidentiary suppression hearing guaranteed by the Due Process Clause but does not have the right to appear at a suppression motion that addresses only legal issues

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).