United States v. Roy Wolf and Lorna Manlolo Wolf, A/K/A Lorna Manlolo McDevitt

How courts have described this case

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

• analyzing whether five statements, which were admissible against one defendant under rule 801(d)(2)(A), were admissible against another defendant under different evidentiary rules
• “[Concealment of the crime done in furtherance of the main criminal objectives of the conspiracy falls within the coconspirator exception.”
• “If the means of obtaining the exculpatory evidence has been provided to the defense, however, a Brady claim fails, even if the prosecution does not physically deliver the evidence requested.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).