Ninth Circuit· 9/7/2011

Sivak v. Hardison

Citations

658 F.3d 898
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 18568
2011 WL 3907111

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that there was a Napue violation at the penalty phase because “this is not a case in which the witness at issue had already been exposed to the factfinder as a liar ” (emphasis added)
concluding that there was a Napue violation at the penalty phase because “this is not a case in which the witness at issue had already been exposed to the factfinder as a liar” (emphasis added)
concluding that there was a Napue violation at the penalty phase because “this is not a case in which the witness at issue had already been exposed to the factfinder as a liar ” (emphasis added)
explaining that had a witness’s lies “been exposed,” the jury likely would have rejected the remaining testimony
explaining that had a witness’s lies “been exposed,” the jury likely would have rejected the remaining testimony
noting that false testimony could not have changed the jury’s determination because the witness’s testimony was “wholly cumulative to the other evidence” of the defendant’s guilt

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kozinski, Thomas, Smith

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

41 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

106 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.