United States v. Peter Simonelli

How courts have described this case

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

• providing “prior statements are admissible which tend to show the statement is not really inconsistent when it is understood in its proper context”
• rejecting the argument that \a general attack on [a witness's] credibility\ can justify the admission of all of the witness's prior consistent statements under the rule of completeness
• \There is no rule admitting all prior consistent statements simply to bolster the credibility of a witness who has been impeached by particulars.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).