· 7/17/2012
United States v. Sangeeta Mann
Citations
- 685 F.3d 714
- 2012 WL 2891244
- 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 14586
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- considering the appellant’s claim that she was denied her right to an impartial jury under plain-error review “in light of the significant fact of her acquittal on the § 1623 charge”
- considering the appellant’s claim that she was denied her right to an impartial jury under plain-error review “in light of the significant fact of her acquittal on the § 1623 charge”
- considering the appellant’s claim that she was denied her right to an impartial jury under plain-error review “in light of the significant fact of her acquittal on the § 1623 charge”
- considering the appellant’s claim that she was denied her right to an impartial jury under plain-error review “in light of the significant fact of her acquittal on the § 1623 charge”
- considering the appellant’s claim that she was denied her right to an impartial jury under plain-error review “in light of the significant fact of her acquittal on the § 1623 charge”
- considering the appellant’s claim that she was denied her right to an impartial jury under plain-error review “in light of the significant fact of her acquittal on the § 1623 charge”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Gruender, Loken, Wollman
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.