United States v. Leonard James and Otto Sebold

How courts have described this case

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

• finding reversal not warranted 64 where defendant was given full opportunity to explore witness's apparent bias
• “a statement may ‘relate,’ within the meaning of [the Jencks Act], not only to the witness’ factual narrative, but also to impeachment of his direct testimony by showing bias and interest.”
• \[Rule 608(b)] was intended to regulate only the use of specific instances of conduct to prove that the witness is a 'bad person' or is a generally untruthful person who should not be believed.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).