Legal Opinion
United States v. Alexander Michael Roy
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided April 26, 2017No. 12-15093PublishedCited by 54 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ED CARNES, Chief Judge:
Because it is a document designed to govern imperfect people, the Constitution does not demand perfect trials and errors do not necessarily require the reversal of a conviction. More than thirty years ago, the Supreme Court reminded us: “As we have stressed on more than one occasion, the Constitution entitles a criminal defendant to a fair trial, not a perfect one.” Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 681, 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1436, 89 L.Ed.2d 674 (1986). Alexander Roy, who was convicted in federal court of five sex-related crimes involving minors, received a fair trial…
2Cases cited126 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
121 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Scott Schmidt v. Brian FosterCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2018
- United States v. Lourdes Margarita GarciaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2018
- United States v. David Ming PonCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2020
- United States v. Lloyd JoynerCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2018
- United States v. Tarresse LeonardCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2021
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.