United States v. Roberto Ramos (87-3921), Carl Sutton, Jr. (87-3922), and Ralph Longmire (87- 3923)

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that defense counsel’s inquiry into a police officer’s reasoning or motivations opens the door to “opportunity to further explain th[ose] reason[s]” (quoting United States v. Peco, 784 F.2d 798, 805 (7th Cir. 1986)
• finding no violation of confrontation right when defendant, on cross-examination, had opened door for government’s line of inquiry
• testimony concerning confession proper to clarify misconception created by challenges to government witness' source of information
• “[W]hen a party opens up a subject . . . [the party] cannot complain on appeal if the opposing party introduces evidence on the same subject.” (citations omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)
• counsel and court interviewed single juror

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).