United States v. Ron Morrison

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that summary denial of a Section 2255 motion is appropriate when the underlying ground for relief is speculative
• holding that a witness was “foreseeable” to the defendant because the defendant had prior dealings with the witness related to the case
• holding that defendant’s corrupt intent to influence testimony and exhortation to witness not to testify truthfully was enough to justify his § 1512(b) conviction, even with no direct threat of either physical or economic harm
• holding that ineffective-assistance claim “did not give rise to the need for an evidentiary hearing” where the claim did “not necessitate the consideration of any information not within the record” and trial counsel’s affidavit describing his trial strategy was well supported by the record
• concluding that the jury was provided with sufficient evidence to find defendant guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b) due to his “corrupt” intent to influence the testimony of a potential witness in his trial when he asked her to testify to a falsehood at trial
• upholding summary denial of § 2255 proceeding in part because the same judge who presided over the original proceedings ruled on the § 2255 motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).