United States v. Joseph Piva

How courts have described this case

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

• noting inappropriateness of use of government officials to vouch for credibility of their informants because evaluation of informant's credibility is up to jury
• stating “the declarant must be available for cross-examination” and allowed the testimony because “there [was] no indication in the record that the defense was precluded from recalling [the declarant] for recross[.]”
• trial court's timely curative instruction to jury eliminated or reduced to harmless error any unfair prejudice caused by police officer's testimony vouching for the credibility of a government informant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).