United States v. Elliot Rivera

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that neither “non-assertive statements that are incapable of being true or false” nor “statements that are indisputably false” qualify as hearsay
• holding that “[o]ut-of-court declarations . . . offered only to show their effect on the listener” did not constitute hearsay
• holding that neither “non-assertive statements that are incapable of being true or false” nor “statements that are indisputably false” qualify as hearsay
• holding that out-of-court statements offered \only to show their effect on the listener\ were not hearsay because they \were not offered for the truth of the matters asserted\
• observing that a “prosecutor . . . cannot” ask one person—there, the defendant himself— “whether a particular witness was lying”
• explaining that prosecutorial misconduct is not reversible unless the defendant shows that the outcome of the trial would have been different

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).