United States v. Roscoe Thomas Brewer

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that we could not say that “the trial court abused its discretion in determining that such circumstantial evidence was relevant and probative, and not remote and prejudicial, under , all the circumstances” (emphasis added)
• “[W]e do not feel that the fixing of the exact date of the car purchase [by the defendant] as occurring after the robbery was essential here.... ”
• “Nor do we think that the absence of proof of prior poverty destroyed the relevance of proof of the [defendant’s] cash purchase here in view of the circumstances recited surrounding the transaction and the other incriminating evidence.”
• focusing on “the particular facts involved”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).