The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Berkovich, 168 F.3d 64 (2nd Cir. 1999):
Berkovich contends first that the court improperly gave a "no ultimate harm" instruction that may have caused the jury to ignore his defense that he knew that the targeted account was closed. 1 In this regard, he relies on our recent decision in United States v. Rossomando, 144 F.3d 197 (2d Cir.1998), where we held that such an instruction might constitute error. Berkovich did not object to the instruction in the district court, and we, like the Rossomando
Page 67
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.