United States v. Mohammad Hassan

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding defendant's exculpatory statements under Rule 106 because they were inadmissible hearsay
• stating that Rule 106 does not “render admissible . . . evidence which is otherwise inadmissible under the hearsay rules”
• stating that the district court reviewed the probable cause determinations de novo in accordance with the Fourth Circuit's precedent
• noting that the Fourth Circuit applies a de novo standard although the Fifth and Second Circuits apply a more deferential standard
• explaining that a witness’s opinion about another party’s statement is admissible only if the “witness’s understanding is predicated on his knowledge and participation in the conversation”
• stating that federal rule 106 “does not render admissible !... evidence which is otherwise inadmissible under the hearsay rules” (omission in original) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).