United States v. Wallace Jerome Moore

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court did not err by refusing to allow the defendant to absent himself from the trial at which his identification would be an integral issue
• “While [the Federal Rules of Evidence] permit the court to continue the trial when the defendant absents himself, [they do] not, concomitantly, vest a right of absence in a defendant.”
• requiring defendant to be present for purpose of in-eourt identification

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).