YOUNG

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (17 total)

• United States v. Thornbrugh, 962 F.2d 1438 (10th Cir. 1992)
  …t of an objection, we assess it under the harmless error standard. See Lonedog, 929 F. 2d at 572; see also United States v. Alexander, 849 F. 2d 1293, 1296 (10th Cir.1988); United States v. Taylor, 800 F. 2d 1012, 1018 (10th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 838, 108 S.Ct. 123, 98 L.Ed.2d 81 (1987). “To determine whether defendants have been deprived of a fair trial, we must view the improper remark in the context of the entire record before the jury. We will not overturn the convictions unless the prosecu…
• United States v. York, 933 F.2d 1343 (7th Cir. 1991)
  …Id. at 206, 84 S.Ct. at 1203. To find a sixth amendment violation, then, the statements in question must have been (1) “deliberately elicited” (2) by a government “agent.” United States v. Taylor, 800 F. 2d 1012, 1015 (10th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 838, 108 S.Ct. 123, 98 L.Ed.2d 81 (1987). The Supreme Court has twice addressed situations in which the government introduced statements made by defendants to “jailhouse informants” against the defendant at trial. In United States v. Henry, 447 U.S. 2…
• United States v. Hilario Mendoza-Salgado, 964 F.2d 993 (10th Cir. 1992)
  …error for appeal, a party must make a timely and proper objection, “ ‘stating the specific ground of objection, if the specific ground was not apparent from the context.’ ” United States v. Taylor, 800 F. 2d 1012, 1017 (10th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 838, 108 S.Ct. 123, 98 L.Ed.2d 81 (1987) (quoting Fed.R.Evid. 103(a)(1)) (emphasis in original). On appeal, the specific ground for reversal on an evidentiary ruling must mirror the objection raised at trial. 800 F. 2d at 1017 (citing Fortier v. Dona An…