United States v. William L. Scholl, United States of America v. William L. Scholl

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting business records that purported to be estimates because they were “trustworthy for what they are—estimates”
• holding that prosecutor’s questions about defendant’s two houses, time share in Hawaii, and golf club membership elicited testimony that “[although marginal,” was nonetheless probative of the defendant’s defense
• holding that judge sought to be recused was not 27 required to refer the recusal motion to another judge because “the § 144 affidavit was neither timely nor sufficient to trigger reassignment.”
• noting that experts should not testify about the law, but instead interpret and analyze factual evidence
• noting matters of law are for the court’s determination, not that of an expert witness
• finding no abuse of discretion in limiting defendant to three character witnesses

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).