United States v. Muessig

How courts have described this case

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

• holding harmless jury's exposure to extraneous exhibit because the gist of the exhibit had already been presented to the jury
• concluding that jury’s exposure to cumulative extraneous material was harmless
• “[W]e need not resolve these different approaches in this appeal” because “[ujnder either standard, we find that the exposure here was harmless.”
• “[W]e need not resolve these different approaches in this appeal” because “[u]nder either standard, we find that the exposure here was harmless.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).