United States v. Stephen F. Ellender, Jim Swope, Roger Dale Collins, and Jim Bourgeois, United States of America v. Carl Tangredi

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that similar time frame, locations, co-conspirators, offenses, and overt acts -17- indicate one conspiracy
• stating that an inmate’s prison records do not qualify as Brady materials because they are not suppressed by the prosecution, and the defendant can easily gain access to them through the exercise of reasonable diligence
• “The precise dates on which the appellant committed the alleged acts are not necessary.”
• “[A]cquittals as to some defendants on some counts support an inference that the jury sorted through the evidence and considered each defendant and each count separately.”
• analysis of whether a prosecutor's argument deprived a defendant of a fair trial involves consideration of (1) the magnitude of the prejudicial effect of the statements; (2) the efficacy of any cautionary instruction; and (3

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).