D.C. Circuit· 5/7/1974

United States v. Perry Lynch

Citations

499 F.2d 1011
163 U.S. App. D.C. 6
1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 8774

How courts have described this case

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

noting that “policies underlying the general prohibition of hearsay” are “especially cogent when the testimony of a witness is critical to the prosecution’s case against the defendant”
requiring good faith effort as an aspect of the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation
“It is difficult to believe that if the preliminary hearing testimony of this critical witness were not available, the prosecution would have abandoned its efforts at this point to locate [the witness].”
confrontation rights are “especially cogent when the testimony of a witness is critical to the prosecution’s case against the defendant”
\Confrontation Clause considerations `are especially cogent when the testimony of a witness is critical to the prosecution's case against the defendant.' \
“We are not prepared to equate ‘unavailability’ with ‘evasiveness.’ The government failed to establish that [the witness] could not have been located and brought to trial by a reasonably diligent search. Accordingly we hold that the witness was not ‘unavailable’ . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Tamm, MacKinnon, McCree

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

47 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.