United States v. Caraway

How courts have described this case

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

• holding witness’s prior statement “was not impeachment evidence because she had [not yet] testified to the contrary”
• noting that under the third prong, a defendant “must demonstrate a reasonable probability that, but for the error claimed, the result of the proceeding would have been different
• explaining that a statement “admitted for impeachment purposes . . . is not hearsay”
• stating that evidence is not unfairly prejudicial merely because it damages a party’s case
• explaining that a statement “admitted for impeachment purposes . . is not hearsay.”
• explaining that “the defendant may not be able to establish prejudice from the cumulation of all the unpreserved errors, but factoring in the preserved errors may be enough for the defendant to satisfy his burden of showing prejudice”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).