United States v. Charles Babbitt, United States of America v. Ismael Santiago

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming admission of defendant’s remote arrest to rebut defendant’s claim that he had no prior record
• no reversible error found in comment, “While you search out the truth you may wish to ask yourself, ‘Who has appeared before me in the form of a witness?’ ”
• trial court did not err in admitting evidence of two remote arrests of defendants when it was admitted only after defendant denied on direct examination that he had a police record

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).