Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Wilson v. Harelson
488 U.S. 917
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1988-10-17
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- holding objection and a posttrial motion are generally necessary to preserve an issue for appeal
- holding objection and a posttrial motion are necessary to preserve an issue for appeal
- holding objec-tion and a posttrial motion are necessary to preserve an issue for appeal
- salesman did not personally seek out customers but used a company brochure and "presented the basic facts necessary to effectuate a sale"; solicitation under section 12(2) found to exist
- jury might understand that written list including nonstatutory mitigating factors is exhaustive and, consequently, fail to consider other unenumerated nonstatutory mitigants
- a party waives an issue for review where it fails to object at trial
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Wilson v. Harelson. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 153 opinions
C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of petitioner to defer consideration of the petition for certiorari denied. Certiorari denied.