United States v. Miriam Santos

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a motion for a continuance implicates the right to choice of counsel when the effect of denying the motion is to deny the defendant the attorney of her choice
• holding that a motion for a continuance implicates the right to choice of counsel when the effect of denying the motion is to deny the defendant the attorney of her choice
• holding that prohibiting the defendant from discussing his ongoing testimony with his attorney during a substantial recess “would as a practical matter preclude the assistance of counsel across a range of legitimate legal and tactical questions”
• noting that “Rule 701 does not interdict all 28 inference drawing by lay witnesses” but such “inferences must be tethered to perception”
• finding a handwritten note inadmissible because it may have been intended as a reflective summary and characterization of conduct rather than a spontaneous reaction to an immediate sensation
• reversing exclusion under FRE 404(b) because evidence at issue was offered for permissible purpose of demonstrating intent, though it was “weak evidence” of intent; instead, such evidence should have been excluded, if at all, under FRE 403

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).