United States v. Louis Ruggiero

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 Constitution “does not re- quire that the jury be allowed to hear evidence that is not relevant to any element of the crime or an affirmative defense”
• explaining that “there is no right to introduce irrelevant evidence” and finding no due process violation where the trial court prevented the jury from hearing evidence that did not speak to an element of the charged offense
• “Section 2251(a) is the ‘production’ section of a broad regulatory scheme that prohibits the production, receipt, distribution, and possession of child pornography.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).