STAGGERS

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Williams, 604 F.2d 1102 (8th Cir. 1979)
  …Officer [*1119] Clark’s association with Ms. Flack. We cannot agree that the trial court abused its discretion in restricting further cross-examination. Fed.R.Evid. 611(b); e. g., United States v. Drake, 542 F. 2d 1020 (8th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1050, 97 S.Ct. 762, 50 L.Ed.2d 766 (1977). We agree with the trial court that further inquiry would have been irrelevant. Morgan next argues that the trial court erred in refusing to strike a juror for cause. Morgan argues that juror Helen M. Dahl shoul…
• United States v. Jabara, 618 F.2d 1319 (9th Cir. 1980)
  …Thus, Hood did not meet her preliminary burden of establishing that she was induced to commit the crime and that she was not predisposed to commit the crime. See United States v. Hermosillo-Nanez, 545 F. 2d 1230, 1232 (9th Cir. 1976); cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1050, 97 S.Ct. 763, 50 L.Ed.2d 767 (1977). When the evidence presents no genuine dispute as to whether the defendant was entrapped, there is no factual issue for the jury, and the judge has a duty to rule on the defense as a matter of law. Glaeser, 550…
• United States v. Gordon, 844 F.2d 1397 (9th Cir. 1988)
  …States v. So, 755 F. 2d 1350, 1354 (9th Cir.1985). On appeal, the evidence and all inferences therefrom will be viewed in a light favorable to the government. See United States v. Hermosillo-Nanez, 545 F. 2d 1230, 1232 (9th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1050, 97 S.Ct. 763, 50 L.Ed.2d 767 (1977). Loeswick argues that there was no evidence that he was predisposed to obstruct the grand jury investigation until Edler became actively involved in the investigation. Edler set up the meeting on May 21, 1984 ov…