United States v. Jorge Jesus-Casteneda

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Confrontation Clause was satisfied even though the witness, a confidential informant, donned a wig and fake mustache
• holding that a confidential informant’s disguise “was necessary to further an important state interest, namely a witness’s safety . . . . given his continuing involvement in [cartel] drug investigations as an undercover agent.”
• listing these as “key elements of one’s demeanor that shed light on credibility”
• “The appropriate standard of review for the district court’s decision to allow the [confidential informant to testify in] disguise is abuse of discretion.”
• “[T]he disguise in the form of a wig and mustache did not violate the Confrontation Clause” where “the reliability of the [informant’s] testimony was otherwise assured . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).