Antoine Mayhand v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that the declarant’s “apparent anger” at the defendant undermined the conclusion that the statement was an excited utterance
• concluding that the declarant’s call to 911 was not an excited utterance in light of the fact that he had “had the wherewithal to call the police, not merely to ask for help but to document [the defendant’s] criminal behavior and to identify him to the police”
• acknowledging a retaliatory act against an individual “on account of” information given to law enforcement constitutes obstruction under analogous subsection § 22-722(a)(4)
• accepting trial court’s description of de-clarant’s tone on 911 cal as “emotionally agitated” but concluding, based on review of call on appeal, that declarant’s tone did not reflect level of emotional upset necessary to support admission, of calí as excitr ed utterance
• “[T]he ‘excited utterance’ exception to the rule against hearsay is well established in this jurisdiction . . . .”
• “[A]ny analysis of the totality of the circumstances must take into account [the declarant’s] apparent anger at [the defendant] and his awareness that he was on the telephone, with the police, reporting a crime.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).