United States v. Ramiro Adames, Robert Lynn Jones, and Dennis Finch

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “all probative evidence is prejudicial to the party against whom it is introduced,” but noting that such prejudice is not necessarily “unfair”
• stating that a dis- trict court’s balancing of probative value versus prejudice is a “highly discretionary function which is afforded great deference by this Court”
• holding that “the officers could not have known that the warrant was invalid at the time it was executed because [the Supreme Court precedent relied upon by the defendant to invalidate the search warrant] was not decided until more than a year later”
• upholding the trial court’s admission of evidence because the evidence was not “shocking or repulsive, such as to elicit an emotional re- sponse from the jury”
• evidence is prejudicial if it will induce jury to decide the case on improper basis, commonly an emotional one
• video of defendant and family opening Christmas presents on irrelevant day properly excluded because designed to garner sympathy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).