United States v. Robert Salerno

How courts have described this case

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

• refusing to suppress the government’s expert evidence because “[f]rom the record, it does not appear that the defendant ever requested any expert discovery material, as Rule 16 required him to do”
• “ ‘Prejudice’ is not caused by allowing the Government properly to strengthen its case, but rather by delays intended to hamper defendant’s ability to present his defense.”
• “[A]s long as the district court is evenhanded in its evidentiary rulings, [it] has wide discretion in determining whether an exhibit will be allowed to go into the jury deliberation room.”
• defendant’s objection to evidence indicating knowledge of potential need for limiting instruction, combined with overt acceptance of court’s final jury instruction without a limiting instruction, demonstrated that defendant “intentionally relinquished his known right”
• United States v. Tedesco, 726 F.2d 1216, 1221 (7th Cir. 1984)
• judgment must be \valid and final\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).