United States v. Perry Burns

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “the repeated incidence of ... protracted proceedings will certainly not promote the expeditious disposition of criminal cases”
• noting that \the repeated incidence of . . . protracted proceedings will certainly not promote the expeditious disposition of criminal cases\
• noting that “if the issues are not plainly dispositive of the case, an appellate court is likely to experience difficulty in determining whether any error that may have occurred should be deemed harmless”
• addressing conditional pleas prior to Rule 11(a)(2) and holding that failure to suppress evidence was harmless error because suppression “would not have altered appellant’s decision to plead guilty”
• addressing conditional pleas prior to Rule 11(a)(2) and holding that failure to suppress evidence was harmless error because suppression “would not have altered appellant’s decision to plead guilty”
• “[W]e find unpersuasive appellant’s claims that the government engaged in either overreaching or manipulative use of immunity to gain a tactical advantage.” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).