United States v. Miguel Torralba-Mendia

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plain error did not affect the outcome where there was “a substantial amount of evidence, aside from [the erroneously admitted testimony]”
• holding that plain error did not affect the outcome where there was “a substantial amount of evidence, aside from [the erroneously admitted testimony]”
• “[A]n officer who has extensively reviewed a video may offer a narration, pointing out particulars that a casual observer might not see.”
• “We remedy a district court’s plain error only when the defendant shows that the error affected his substantial rights.”
• evidence about an “organization’s methods” can help to “prove the existence of a conspiracy and put [the defendant’s] actions in context”
• “[T]he district court should require an adequately specific foundation, so that the jury has the information needed to evaluate the case agent’s testimony.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).