United States v. Patricia M. Donato

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that judge’s failure to provide counsel with bench conference outside the jury’s presence violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 30 and constituted prejudicial error
• finding that judge's failure to provide counsel with bench conference outside the jury's presence violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 30 and constituted prejudicial error
• finding that judge's failure to provide counsel with bench conference outside the jury's presence violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 30 and constituted prejudicial error
• finding that judge’s intense hostility toward the defendant and defense counsel raised a serious question of bias
• acknowledging that “[i]t will nearly always be impossible... for a defendant to show prejudice from a violation of Rule 24(c)” and finding that “[w]e are unwilling to conclude that a right as important as this one is incapable of being vindicated on appeal”
• reversing where the trial judge “frequently berated, interrupted, and otherwise spoke negatively to the defendant’s attorney,” including “[d]uring what were arguably the two most critical moments” of the “relative[ly] br[ief]” trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).