United States v. Miguel Pagan, Sr. And Francisco Herrera-Ruiz

How courts have described this case

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

• upholding denial of mistrial based on Article 36 violation where the defendant did not show how notice of Article 36 rights would have influenced evidence put to jury
• upholding denial of mistrial based on Article 36 violation where the defendant did not show how notice of Article 36 rights would have influenced evidence put to jury
• “The extent to which [a witness’s] personal failings and motivations may have influenced his testimony was for the jury to decide.”
• “The extent to which [a witness’s] personal failings and motiva- tions may have influenced his testimony was for the jury to decide.”
• “The fact that Pagan may have ‘trusted’ Herrera-Ruiz more than the other street-level dealers in his operation, standing alone, does not support the enhancement.”
• “The extent to which [the informant’s] personal failings and motivations may have influenced his testimony was for the jury to decide.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).