United States v. Jose Luis Castillo

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “impeachment by contradiction permits courts to admit extrinsic evidence that specific testimony is false, because contradicted by other evidence”
• recognizing that “impeachment by contradiction permits courts to admit extrinsic evidence that specific testimony is false, because USA V. HOLMES 45 contradicted by other evidence”
• noting that admission of evidence pursuant to Rule 404(b) is subject to Rule 403 analysis
• “[I]mpeachment by contradiction permits courts to admit extrinsic evidence that specific testimony is false, because contradicted by other evidence.”
• “[T]he concept of impeachment by contradiction permits courts to admit extrinsic evidence that specific testimony is false, because contradicted by other evidence. . . .”
• “Courts are more willing to permit, and commentators more willing to endorse, impeachment by contradiction where . . . testimony is volunteered on direct examination.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).