DAVIS

v.

MEMBERS OF SELECTIVE SERVICE BOARD NO. 30 OF DALLAS, TEXAS, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Noah, 475 F.2d 688 (9th Cir. 1973)
  …ho had sold narcotics directly to government agents. The burden of proving prejudice is a difficult one, and the ruling of the trial judge will rarely be disturbed on review. United States v. DeSapio, 435 F. 2d 272, 280 (2nd Cir. 1970), cert. denied 402 U.S. 999, 91 S.Ct. 2170, 29 L.Ed.2d 166 (1971). Again, we find no abuse of discretion. 3. Prejudicial publicity. This argument has already been considered and rejected. See part 4 of the Noah opinion, supra. [*697] 4. Fifth amendment privilege. This argum…
• United States v. Friedman, 854 F.2d 535 (2d Cir. 1988)
  …an abuse of this discretion, it will not suffice simply to establish that a defendant would have had a better chance of obtaining an acquittal at a separate trial. E.g., id.; United States v. DeSapio, 435 F. 2d 272, 280 (2d Cir.1970), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 999, 91 S.Ct. 2170, 29 L.Ed.2d 166 (1971). Rather, the defendant must show that he or she suffered prejudice so substantial as to amount to a “miscarriage of justice.” United States v. Bari, 750 F. 2d 1169, 1177 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 101…
• United States v. Lyles, 593 F.2d 182 (2d Cir. 1979)
  …fficient account of the intelligence and conscientiousness of the jury, the effective efforts of the judge to keep it on the beam, [and] the skill of defense counsel . . ..” United States v. DeSapio, 435 F. 2d 272, 280 (2d Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 999, 91 S.Ct. 2170, 29 L.Ed.2d 166 (1971) (citation omitted). Even where damaging similar act evidence introduced against one defendant is not clearly unrelated to a co-defendant, cautionary instructions have been held sufficient protection. United Stat…