United States v. Peter Saunders

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the extremely limited probative value of a report justified its exclusion under cross-examination
• noting that the probative value of Rule 608(b) evidence “must still outweigh the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury”
• noting that whether a defendant’s statement constituted a threat is an issue of fact
• upholding “destructive device” conviction when detective testified that “all of the components necessary to make the device explode were present in the device”
• noting the probative value of Rule 608(b) evidence “must still outweigh the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury”
• affirming the exclusion of a report of an investigation of a DEA expert where the report was offered to show bias

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).