U.S. v. Barnhart

In prosecution on wire fraud charges stemming from defendant's actions in obtaining business-related loans on false pretenses, and spending loan proceeds on luxury personal items, Dist. Ct. erred in questioning certain witnesses that gave jury impression that he did not believe defendant's theory of the case, and that he thought govt. case was strong. Error, though, was harmless where Dist. Ct. gave instruction reminding jury that nothing it said should be construed as opinion about evidence, and where evidence of defendant's guilt, that included misrepresentations about solvency of defendant's company, as well as evidence of defendant's spending on luxury items, was overwhelming.