Com. v. Harvey, F.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding use of vague words like “stuff’ sufficient to support possession charge
• noting that a “district court, which has viewed the trial evidence first-hand, may order a new trial when it perceives that the jury improperly weighed some of that evidence; but it would be a rare case in which an appellate court could make that kind of judgment”
• “The role of the hearsay rule . . . is to protect against statements that cannot be challenged by cross-examining the speaker. Cross-examination can expose problems with the speaker’s perception, memory, or truthfulness.”
• questions asserted nothing so they were not hearsay

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).