United States v. Maxie Eldon Milton, Eugene L. Fowler, and Andrew Areaux, Defendants

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, in a criminal prosecution for conducting an illegal gambling business, a government expert’s testimony that certain transactions constituted “lay off bets” was admissible
• “[C]ourts must remain vigilant against the admission of legal conclusions, and an expert witness may not substitute for the court in charging the jury regarding the applicable law.”
• “[C]ourts must remain vigilant against the admission of legal conclusions, and an expert witness may not substitute for the court in charging the jury regarding the applicable law.”
• “[T]he trial court’s admonitions to the jury to accord no unusual deference to expert testimony and to take the court’s instructions as the sole source of applicable law . . . helped protect against the jury’s misconstruing [the expert’s] statement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).