United States v. Karsten Buffalo

How courts have described this case

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

• abuse of discretion to exclude extrinsic evidence of witness’s prior inconsistent statement confessing to crime for which defendant was on trial
• abuse of discretion to exclude extrinsic evidence of witness’s prior inconsistent statement confessing to crime for which defendant was on trial
• if the foundational requirements are met, the question of the admissibility of the prior inconsistent statement used against a party’s own witness depends upon a Rule 403 balancing inquiry
• “Eighth Circuit case law clearly provides that the probative value of a Rule 613(b) prior inconsistent statement must be weighed against the prejudicial effect of its admission . . .” (citing Logan, 121 F.3d at 1175)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).