United States v. Pineda-Doval

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there was constitutional error where a total exclusion of evidence wholly “denied the defendant the only argument that he had”
• holding that there was constitutional error where a total exclusion of evidence wholly “denied the defendant the only argument that he had”
• explaining that procedures violating a defendant’s right to present a defense involved evidentiary rules that “undermined fundamental elements of the defendant’s defense”
• noting that “second-degree murder required a finding of extreme recklessness evincing disregard for human life, not simple recklessness” (emphasis added)
• explaining that cases that violated a defendant’s right to present a defense involved evidentiary rules that “undermined fundamental elements of the defendant’s defense”
• explaining that malice aforethought requires conduct creating “a very high degree of risk of injury to other persons” and that the defendant “be aware of that risk” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).