United States v. Randall Hoyt Shaw

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 district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion for a continuance based upon the unavailability of a witness
• “We review a district court’s ruling on the admissibility of evidence under the abuse of discretion standard.”
• “This court has repeatedly held that any break in the chain of custody of physical evidence does not render the evidence inadmissible but instead goes to the weight that the jury should accord that evidence.”
• orally pronouncement is 71 months of imprisonment; written judgment is 72 months of imprisonment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).