NATHAN

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Lemire, 720 F.2d 1327 (D.C. Cir. 1983)
  …ert. denied, 441 U.S. 946, 99 S.Ct. 2168, 60 L.Ed.2d 1049 (1979); United States v. Evans, 572 F. 2d 455 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 870, 99 S.Ct. 200, 58 L.Ed.2d 182 (1978); United States v. Nathan, 536 F. 2d 988, 996 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 930, 97 S.Ct. 337, 50 L.Ed.2d 300 (1976). The defendants argue that Rule 1006 was meant to be restricted to summaries of writings not feasible for direct admission into evidence. See Reply Brief for Appellants at 24. The language of Rule 1006, however…
• United States v. Stirling, 571 F.2d 708 (2d Cir. 1978)
  …ructions were not to be used as indicators of its opinion. Because no objections to the charge were made by the appellants, they are barred from raising them now. Fed.R.Crim.P. 30; United States v. Nathan, 536 F. 2d 988, 992 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 930, 97 S.Ct. 337, 50 L.Ed.2d 300 (1976). Even if objection had been made, the instruction was fair and proper. See United States v. Cheung Kin Ping, 555 F. 2d 1069, 1074 (2d Cir. 1977); United States v. Floyd, 555 F. 2d 45, 47 (2d Cir. 1977); United St…
• United States v. Scales, 594 F.2d 558 (6th Cir. 1979)
  …ny was insufficient because Agent Tosi was not an expert. Size alone does not render inadmissible an exhibit containing otherwise unobjectionable objective evidence. Cf. United States v. Nathan, 536 F. 2d 988, 992 n. 5 (2nd Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 930, 97 S.Ct. 337, 50 L.Ed.2d 300. Given the nature of Exhibit 145, it is difficult to see how Agent Tosi’s lack of expertise could have prejudiced appellant. The chart did not contain complicated calculations that would require an expert for accuracy.…