United States v. McCourty

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that when theories of liability are pleaded in conjunctive, defendant may be found guilty on proof of any one theory
• observing that only “exceptional circumstances” will override deference normally accorded jury’s evaluation of evidence and determinations of credibility (citation omitted)
• stating that jury’s function is to weigh evidence and assess witness credibility, and that Rule 33 motion is justified only where testimony is “patently incredible or defies physical realities” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• involving the use of “yes” and “no” on a verdict sheet in response to the question “[h]as the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant possessed with the intent to distribute more than five grams of crack”
• “No constructive amendment resulted when the District Court broke the single offense into two parts to be addressed by the jury.”
• “[W]here the resolution of the Rule 33 motion depend[s] on assessment of the credibility of the witnesses, it is proper for the court to refrain from setting aside the verdict and granting a new trial.” (second alteration in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).