United States v. Vito Caliendo, Susan Barker, Salvatore Cataudella and Thomas Stathas

How courts have described this case

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

• Defendants claimed no knowledge of the activities or purposes—“the prototype” for an ostrich in‐ struction.
• three isolated references by government to witness’ participation in witness protection program not reversible error
• “if the evidence against the defendant points solely to direct’knowledge of the criminal venture, it would be error to give the [ostrich] instruction.”
• defendant had been present when her coconspir-ators discussed illegal operations
• “[T]he evidence reveals that Vito Caliendo did know about the conspiracy’s illegal purpose and, indeed, went to great lengths to bring about and protect that purpose. For this reason, we conclude that Vito Caliendo was not prejudiced by the ostrich instruction given.”
• defendant had been present when her coconspirators discussed illegal operations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).