Skip navigation
Punch and Jurists

Search

More search options »
11 results
U.S. v. Kappell, No. 04-1333 (6th Cir.) (418 F.3d 550) (September 9, 2005) (Judge Daniel M. Friedman)
Article • September 1, 2005 • from P&J September, 2005
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Statements for Medical Diagnosis
U.S. v. Kappell, No. 04-1333 (6th Cir.) (418 F.3d 550) (September 9, 2005) (Judge Daniel M. Friedman) by In a prosecution for child sexual abuse, statements that the alleged victims made to a psychotherapist and a social worker who interviewed the alleged victims were admissible under the hearsay exception contained …
U.S. v. Mornan, No. 04-1319 (3rd Cir.) (413 F.3d 372) (June 30, 2005) (Judge Franklin S. Van Antwerpen)
Article • August 1, 2005 • from P&J August, 2005
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Recorded Recollection
U.S. v. Mornan, No. 04-1319 (3rd Cir.) (413 F.3d 372) (June 30, 2005) (Judge Franklin S. Van Antwerpen) by The defendant was charged in an 18-count indictment with mail fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy arising from an alleged telemarketing scheme. A jury found him guilty on 15 counts, and he …
U.S. v. Smith, No. 98-5888 (6th Cir.) (197 F.3d 225) (November 24, 1999) (Judge Gilbert S. Merritt)
Article • January 1, 2000 • from P&J January, 2000
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Recorded Recollection
U.S. v. Smith, No. 98-5888 (6th Cir.) (197 F.3d 225) (November 24, 1999) (Judge Gilbert S. Merritt) by In this case one defendant challenged the admission of a "Recorded Recollection" of the testimony of one witness against him, claiming that the court erred in admitting that evidence of a past …
U.S. v. Montero-Camargo, No. 97-50643 (9th Cir.) (177 F.3d 1113) (May 13, 1999) (Judge Frank C. Jr. Damrell)
Article • July 1, 1999 • from P&J July, 1999
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Hearsay Evidence/Exceptions
U.S. v. Montero-Camargo, No. 97-50643 (9th Cir.) (177 F.3d 1113) (May 13, 1999) (Judge Frank C. Jr. Damrell) by Here the Court affirmed the use of hearsay evidence under the "present sense impression" exception contained in Rule 803(1) since it was contemporaneously made with little chance for reflection.
U.S. v. Williams, No. 97-2576 (7th Cir.) (133 F.3d 1048) (January 16, 1998) (Judge William J. Bauer)
Article • March 1, 1998 • from P&J March, 1998
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Hearsay Evidence/Exceptions
U.S. v. Williams, No. 97-2576 (7th Cir.) (133 F.3d 1048) (January 16, 1998) (Judge William J. Bauer) by The defendant in this case was convicted of armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) - despite the fact that both the district court and the Court of Appeals …
McBride v. Johnson, No. 96-10270 (5th Cir.) (118 F.3d 432) (August 1, 1997) (Judge Carl E. Stewart)
Article • August 1, 1997 • from P&J August, 1997
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Hearsay Evidence/Exceptions
McBride v. Johnson, No. 96-10270 (5th Cir.) (118 F.3d 432) (August 1, 1997) (Judge Carl E. Stewart) by This is an important decision that holds that the Texas Board of Corrections violated the petitioner's constitutional rights to procedural due process when it revoked the petitioner's parole on the basis of …
McBride v. Johnson, No. 96-10270 (5th Cir.) (118 F.3d 432) (August 1, 1997) (Judge Carl E. Stewart)
Article • August 1, 1997 • from P&J August, 1997
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Hearsay Evidence/Exceptions
McBride v. Johnson, No. 96-10270 (5th Cir.) (118 F.3d 432) (August 1, 1997) (Judge Carl E. Stewart) by Court held that use of hearsay evidence as basis for revoking parole constituted a violation of his procedural due process and Sixth Amendment rights.
U.S. v. Houlihan, No. 95-1614 (1st Cir.) (92 F.3d 1271) (August 22, 1996) (Judge Bruce M. Selya)
Article • September 1, 1996 • from P&J September, 1996
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Hearsay Evidence/Exceptions
U.S. v. Houlihan, No. 95-1614 (1st Cir.) (92 F.3d 1271) (August 22, 1996) (Judge Bruce M. Selya) by Court observed that the Supreme Court "has yet to plot the crossroads at which the Confrontation Clause and the hearsay principles embedded in the Evidence Rules intersect". This case is noted in …
U.S. v. Brothers, No. 95-1303 (3rd Cir.) (75 F.3d 845) (February 1, 1996) (Judge H. Lee Sarokin)
Article • March 1, 1996 • from P&J March, 1996
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Hearsay Evidence/Exceptions
U.S. v. Brothers, No. 95-1303 (3rd Cir.) (75 F.3d 845) (February 1, 1996) (Judge H. Lee Sarokin) by While this decision is not particularly scintillating, it is cited because it shows some of the growing discontent with the level of proof that is required at sentencing. Here, a sentence is …
U.S. v. Wiedyk, No. 94-2342 (6th Cir.) (71 F.3d 602) (December 14, 1995) (Judge Cornelia G. Kennedy)
Article • January 1, 1996 • from P&J January, 1996
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Hearsay Evidence/Exceptions
U.S. v. Wiedyk, No. 94-2342 (6th Cir.) (71 F.3d 602) (December 14, 1995) (Judge Cornelia G. Kennedy) by Although this case ultimately holds that the improper admission of some hearsay evidence was harmless error, it is cited because it discusses in some detail Rule 801(d)(2)(D) of the Fed.R.Evid. That subsection, …
U.S. v. Huckins, No. 94-30052 (9th Cir.) (53 F.3d 276) (April 25, 1995) (Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain)
Article • June 1, 1995
Filed under: Punch And Jurists, Hearsay Evidence/Exceptions
U.S. v. Huckins, No. 94-30052 (9th Cir.) (53 F.3d 276) (April 25, 1995) (Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain) by The Court noted that "Generally, hearsay evidence indeed may be used in sentencing. See U.S.S.G. 6A1.3(a). Because this court has held that 'a defendant clearly has a due process right not to …