United States v. Preston T. Patterson, United States of America v. Benjamin Demagistris

How courts have described this case

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

• determining there is a charge of recent fabrication if “[t]he jury could have thought it was being suggested that [a witness]’s testimony 18 was recently fabricated”
• “[t]he jury could have thought it was being suggested that [the defendant’s] testimony was recently fabricated or improperly influenced”
• “The determination of . . . whether the circumstances indicate untrustworthiness[] is within the discretion of the district court.”
• “The fact that a regular practice is occasionally broken is not enough to avoid application of the business records rule; otherwise, the rule would be swallowed up by an exception for less-than-perfect business practices.”
• clearly erroneous standard for determining coconspirators under Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).