United States v. Maurice Maxwell

How courts have described this case

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

• determining that there was no plain error if “it may be to defendants’ advantage to accept the hearsay version of evidence.... The lack of a demand for testimony by an available de-clarant leads to the conclusion that the appellate argument is strategic rather than sincere.”
• “[Williams] left no clear guidance about how exactly an expert must phrase its testimony about the results of testing performed by another analyst in order for the testimony to be admissible.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).