United States v. Tommy Joe Barrow

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “the government was as much at fault for inviting the error as the defendant since the parties stipulated to the same instructions”
• stating that, “[i]n Thomp son’s P etition for Certio rari, p.1 4-16 (emp hasis ad ded ). general, the appellate court should have before it the record Hansen also rep resented that: and facts considered by the District Court”
• reviewing invited error where the government stipulated to the challenged instruction, which implicated constitutional rights
• “Most importantly, assuming that error occurred, the government was as much at fault for inviting the error as the defendant since the parties stipulated to the same instructions.”
• Invited error “is a branch of tire doctrine of waiver” that may yield to “the interests of justice,” as where both the government and the defense jointly requested a defective jury instruction.
• “[T]he doctrine of ‘invited error’ [] holds that a party may not complain . . . of errors that he himself invited or provoked the court or the opposite party to make.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).