United States v. Lawrence O. Larson, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “the party claiming 19 the benefit of mootness” must carry the burden of establishing that the claim is moot
• holding that to be valid, a stipulation must be knowing and intelligent, requiring that a defendant “entered into it ‘with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and likely consequences’” (quoting Adams v. Peterson, 968 F.2d 835, 844 (9th Cir. 1992) (en banc))
• defendant stipulated that he was a felon and \knowingly had in his possession\ a pistol that crossed state lines
• “The stipulation moots [plaintiff’s] challenge to the suppression ruling only if it is valid.”
• “the stipulation itself was sufficient to convict him”
• \the stipulation itself was sufficient to convict him\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).