discussed Cited "see" United States v. Bolden (2×) See United States v. Paul, 217 F.3d 989 , 995 n. 2, 1001 (8th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 829 , 122 S.Ct. 71 , 151 L.Ed.2d 37 (2001).

discussed Cited "see" United States v. Solomon See United States v. Paul, 217 F.3d 989, 1003 (8th Cir.2000) (finding no violation of the separation of powers because “the prosecution was adequately limited in its power” by the factors listed in Jones), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 829 , 122 S.Ct. 71 , 151 L.Ed.2d 37 (2001); United States v. McCullah, 76 F.3d 1087, 1106-07 (10th Cir.1996) (finding the notice requirement, the court’s power to exclude certain information, and the requirement that the jury first find mens rea and a statutory aggravating factor adequately guided the prosecution’s choice of non-statutory ag-gravators), cer t. …

discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Taylor Maynard, 486 U.S. at 365 , 108 S.Ct. at 1859 ; see also United States v. Paul, 217 F.3d 989,1001 (8th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 829 , 122 S.Ct. 71 , 151 L.Ed.2d 37 (2001)(finding no unconstitutional vagueness where jury instruction for the “heinous, cruel and depraved” aggravating factor extensively defined the three terms).