United States v. Keith Newman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding prior convictions for \theft by deception\ and \theft-forgery\ were properly admitted under Rule 609(a)(2)
• holding prior convictions for “theft by deception” and “theft forgery” were properly admitted under Rule 609(a)(2), with Coursey v. Broadhurst, 888 F.2d 338, 341 (5th Cir. 1989
• government not obligated to furnish defendant with information he already has or can obtain with reasonable diligence
• government not obligated to furnish defendant with information he already has or can obtain with reasonable diligence
• Witness did not adopt a DEA report when he told the DEA agent that he did not disagree with anything in the report.
• admission of non-testifying defendant's prior convictions permitted under Rule 806 and otherwise harmless error because evidence of guilt overwhelming and some convictions already properly admitted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).