United States v. Refugio Ruiz

How courts have described this case

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

• allowing admission of prior consistent statements after defense counsel’s cross-examination implied the witness had fabricated on the stand by noting his testimony included observations his prior statements had not mentioned
• upholding admission of statements made “shortly after” 10 No. 13-1087 observations
• upholding admission of surveilling officer's contemporaneous description of defendant and his movements at the back of apartment building via radio to his partner who could not see the defendant from his post at the front of the apartment building
• “[S]ubstantial contemporaneity of event and statement minimizes unreliability due to defective recollection or conscious fabrication.”
• present sense impression exception not undermined where declarant went to neighbor’s house before calling police
• the statement is admissible under Rule 801(d)(1)(B) if “the declarant testifies at trial and is subject to cross examination ... [and] his prior statement is indeed consistent with this trial testimony[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).