United States v. Sherond Duron King

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that issues not raised in an appellant’s initial brief are deemed abandoned, and we will not address them
• explaining that terse statements or arguments in passing are insufficient to save an issue from abandonment
• explaining that we will exclude an out-of-court identification only if it was unduly suggestive “and the identification did not contain sufficient indicia of reliability”
• “Finding that a defendant’s convictions were ‘second or subsequent’ is the same as finding that a defendant had a prior conviction, and the issue remains governed by Almendarez-Torres [and unaltered by Alleyne].”
• holding there was sufficient evidence to support § 924(c) convictions where the jury heard testimony from victims—several of whom had the weapon thrust into their face—about a gun being used in each robbery and saw videos and photographs of the robberies
• noting how the “weapon [was] thrust directly in [the wit- nesses’] faces”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).