United States v. Thomas J. McElroy Jr., and Robert H. Stedman

How courts have described this case

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

• finding the court “well within the bounds of discretion in declining to have more [than the cross-examination] reread”
• finding no abuse of discretion when the court refused to allow additional testimony reread, since the court asked the jury whether the reread portion was \what [it] requested\ and the jury answered in the affirmative
• finding no abuse of discretion when the court refused to allow additional testimony reread, since the court asked the jury whether the reread portion was “what [it] requested” and the jury answered in the affirmative
• finding no abuse of discretion when the court refused to allow additional testimony reread, since the court asked the jury whether the reread portion was “what [it] requested” and the jury answered in the affirmative
• application of Guidelines to established facts will not be overturned absent abuse of discretion
• “For one offense to be ‘included’ in a second offense, all of the elements of the first offense must be elements of the second.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).