United States v. Carey Robinzine

How courts have described this case

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

• noting challenged testimony was non-hearsay because the “significance of the words was that they were said (i.e., that a ‘verbal act’ occurred) . . ., not the truth-value of what was said”
• Statements offered not to prove “the truth of the matter asserted” but for another legitimate purpose do “not even fit the definition of hearsay.”
• “In fact, the statement by [the de-clarant] was not even a factual one; it was a request or an order that did not actually assert anything. It could not be hearsay, since. it made. no assertion of fact that could be true or false.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).