United States v. Thomas York

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that statements demonstrating inside knowledge of the crime are against penal interest
• holding that a “prearrangement” makes the person in question a government agent
• finding that certain facts suggested that the informant was an “entrepreneur” who hoped to sell information to the government, not a government agent
• stating that \[t]he man who wins the lottery once is envied; the one who wins it twice is investigated\
• stating that “[t]he man who wins the lottery once is envied; the one who wins it twice is investigated”
• recognizing trolling to be improper; finding that while informant was agent, he did not deliberately elicit statements from defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).