Algoma Steel Corp. v. United States

observing that reversal of convictions is required if instructions “could have led the jury to convict for conduct outside the proscription of the mail fraud statute” | joinder proper where common factual questions allow the jury to draw consistent conclusion regarding facts relevant to separate counts | erroneous instruction on essential element of crime is constitutional error subject to harmless beyond a reasonable doubt test | "[a]s a condition precedent to a summary process action, proper notice to quit is a jurisdictional necessity" | “[a]s a condition precedent to a summary process action, proper notice to quit is a jurisdictional necessity” | motion to reconsider denial of new trial allowed for intervening change in law when filed prior to final judgment | motion to reconsider denial of new trial allowed for intervening change in law when filed prior to final judgment | newspapers had First Amendment right of access after trial and verdict to juror identities | court can consider pleadings and affidavits and take other evidence in determining subject matter jurisdiction | a district court must engage in de novo review where a party has objected to a magistrate’s decision | once government has met its burden with respect to enforcement of customs summons, burden shifts to the respondent to challenge the summons on any appropriate ground | evidence supported arguing conclusion that defense witnesses were “friends” of the defendant | McNally was "wholly unexpected explication of the law of mail fraud." | McNally was “wholly unexpected explication of the law of mail fraud.” | court noted that, although the witnesses were not asked to make an in-court identification, the witnesses did not deny defendant's identity and defendant had the same name and nickname as the person indicted and about whom the witnesses spoke | court noted that, although the witnesses were not asked to make an in-court identification, the witnesses did not deny defendant's identity and defendant had the same name and nickname as the person indicted and about whom the witnesses spoke | “RICO requires no more than a slight effect upon interstate commerce” | principle as applied to summary process