United States v. Moraga

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that unlawful possession of a firearm “during the commission of a crime of violence” is not a separate crime from unlawful possession of a firearm, but merely a sentence enhancer for that offense
• “[Wjhen an appellate court reviews the sufficiency of the evidence, it must ‘consider all the evidence the [jury] had before it, including any evidence that is later determined to be inadmissible.’ ”
• “when an appellate court reviews the sufficiency of the evidence, it must consider all the evidence the jury had before it, including any evidence that is later determined to be inadmissible” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
• certificates presented from St. Thomas and St. Croix Districts
• “[Wjhen an appellate court reviews the sufficiency of the evidence, it must ‘consider all the evidence the [jury] had before it, including any evidence that it is later determined to be inadmissible.’ ” (quoting State v. Frazier, 2001 SD 19, 622 N.W.2d 246, 261 (S.D. 2001))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).