United States v. Windrix

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the jury’s ability to distinguish the defendant from his co-defendants was demonstrated by its acquittal of a co-defendant on all counts while convicting the defendant
• observing that substantial prejudice has occurred \if the evidence adduced against co-conspirators involved in separate conspiracies was more likely than not imputed to the defendant by the jury in its determination of the defendant's guilt\
• observing that substantial prejudice has occurred “if the evidence adduced against co-conspirators involved in separate conspiracies was more likely than not imputed to the defendant by the jury in its determination of the defendant’s guilt”
• noting that the jury’s ability to distinguish the defendant from his co-defendants was demonstrated by its acquittal of a co- defendant on all counts while convicting the defendant
• declining to address an issue that the party “did not argue in district court,” because “in general we will not consider an argument not raised below”
• declining to address a claim petitioner did not raise before district court

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).