United States v. Juan Jose Silva

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a police officer’s testimony about the recovery of marijuana from a car in which the defendant in a methamphetamine No. 19-2985 7 dealing case had been a passenger during the course of an extended undercover investigation was not relevant
• holding that a police officer’s testimony about the recovery of marijuana from a car in which the defendant in a methamphetamine No. 19-2985 7 dealing case had been a passenger during the course of an extended undercover investigation was not relevant
• noting generally that a Cl statement may be introduced if it would help the jury understand why the police targeted a seemingly random individual
• rejecting course of investigation rationale for admitting evidence when the evidence was not relevant except for its truth
• “Allowing agents to narrate the course of their investigations, and thus spread before juries damning information that is not subject to cross-examination, would go far toward abrogating the defendant’s rights under the sixth amendment and the hearsay rule”
• “Allowing agents to narrate the course of their investigations, and thus spread before juries damning information that is not subject to cross-examination, would go far toward abrogating the defendant’s rights under the sixth amendment and the hearsay rule.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).