United States v. Robert D. Sutton, James H. Fleming, and Michael L. Brown

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 no violation of the Confrontation Clause by the admission of testimony regarding the codefendant’s confession because it was properly redacted using neutral pronouns not implicating the defendant
• rejecting argu- ment that the government must show a substantial effect on interstate commerce to support a Hobbs Act violation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).