United States v. David T. Lewis

How courts have described this case

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

• interpreting Rule 609 of the Federal Rules of Evidence to require that the crime involve dishonesty or false statement as an element of the statutory offense
• “With appellant defending himself by denying knowledge of drug transactions, it is clear that his prior conviction on a plea of guilty to distributing heroin has substantial probative value on the issue of his credibility.”
• “Courts should be reluctant to exclude otherwise admissible evidence that would permit an accused to appear before a jury as a person whose character entitles him to complete credence when his criminal record stands as direct testimony to the contrary.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).