United States v. Pine, Frank, III

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that instruction telling jury “[y]our basic task is to evolve the truth” could “dilute and thereby impair the constitutional requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt”
• noting that instruction telling jury “[y]our -12- basic task is to evolve the truth” could “dilute and thereby impair the constitutional requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt”
• affirming conviction despite “truth” instruction “in light of the trial judge’s full and forceful charge on the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt”
• affirming conviction despite “truth” instruction “in light of the trial judge’s full and forceful charge on the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt”
• “district courts ... [must] not use language in instructions which can be understood as diluting or in any way impairing the constitutional requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
• proper test is to determine improper instructions’ effect on jury’s understanding of the law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).