Add to ORKGThe Court held that intent is automatically at issue for specific-intent crimes. Therefore, criminal defendants need not place intent or absence of mistake at issue before the State seeks to admit prior act evidence if the evidence is relevant to prove an essential element of the offense (i.e., intent for the crime of burglary). However, prior act evidence may still be inadmissible where its minimal probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice
A district court\u27s failure to provide a jury instruction prohibiting jurors from conducting indep...
In denying appellant’s motion for a mistrial, the Court held that (1) to prove prosecutorial miscond...
This article examines a case, United States v. Richards, 719 F.3d 746 (7th Cir. 2013), to illustrate...
The Court held that intent is automatically at issue for specific-intent crimes. Therefore, criminal...
The Court affirmed Defendant\u27s conviction, holding that Defendant waived his Bruton challenge, an...
The Nevada Supreme Court determined that a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a jury verdict, of on...
The Court reviewed whether a district court’s decision to allow the State to introduce prior inciden...
The Court determined that 1) multiple convictions under NRS 202.285(1) are not redundant because the...
The Court determined that 1) multiple convictions under NRS 202.285(1) are not redundant because the...
Defendant was charged with unlawful possession of burglary tools, and fraudulent attempt to obtain n...
The Court determined that a declarant must have testified and have been subject to cross-examination...
The Court determined although the district court has broad discretion to settle jury instructions, t...
Martinez Guzman was indicted by a grand jury for five burglaries and four murders occurring in two c...
A request for a jury instruction on a lesser-included offense is sufficient if there is any evidence...
The Court determined that a defendant is not entitled to cross examine examiners who find him incomp...
A district court\u27s failure to provide a jury instruction prohibiting jurors from conducting indep...
In denying appellant’s motion for a mistrial, the Court held that (1) to prove prosecutorial miscond...
This article examines a case, United States v. Richards, 719 F.3d 746 (7th Cir. 2013), to illustrate...
The Court held that intent is automatically at issue for specific-intent crimes. Therefore, criminal...
The Court affirmed Defendant\u27s conviction, holding that Defendant waived his Bruton challenge, an...
The Nevada Supreme Court determined that a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a jury verdict, of on...
The Court reviewed whether a district court’s decision to allow the State to introduce prior inciden...
The Court determined that 1) multiple convictions under NRS 202.285(1) are not redundant because the...
The Court determined that 1) multiple convictions under NRS 202.285(1) are not redundant because the...
Defendant was charged with unlawful possession of burglary tools, and fraudulent attempt to obtain n...
The Court determined that a declarant must have testified and have been subject to cross-examination...
The Court determined although the district court has broad discretion to settle jury instructions, t...
Martinez Guzman was indicted by a grand jury for five burglaries and four murders occurring in two c...
A request for a jury instruction on a lesser-included offense is sufficient if there is any evidence...
The Court determined that a defendant is not entitled to cross examine examiners who find him incomp...
A district court\u27s failure to provide a jury instruction prohibiting jurors from conducting indep...
In denying appellant’s motion for a mistrial, the Court held that (1) to prove prosecutorial miscond...
This article examines a case, United States v. Richards, 719 F.3d 746 (7th Cir. 2013), to illustrate...