United States v. Marcus Williams, United States of America v. Cortez Williams

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant was not entitled to a new trial or to a post-trial evidentiary hearing concerning potential misconduct on the basis that a juror gave an incorrect answer to a vague question on voir dire
• finding an evidentiary hearing was not warranted because defense counsel assumed the risk by failing to conduct a thorough voir dire
• finding no showing of juror misconduct when juror was asked “whether the names of ‘these two’ defendants meant anything to her” and the juror failed to disclose that her grandson shared the same full name as one of the defendants
• finding juror did not deliberately conceal information when she was asked if she knew the defendant, Marcus Williams, which she responded she did not, but she did know another man by that same name whom the defendant contended was responsible for the crimes
• if defendant fails to object to juror, has Sixth Amendment claim only if proves actual bias
• \district court has broad discretion in handling allegations of juror misconduct\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).