United States v. Rondeau

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that out- of-court statements were reliable where, inter alia, “police corroborated” the statements by finding the assailant “in a car that matched [the declarant’s] description”
• noting that police corroborated 911 call by locating defendant near caller’s building in a car matching caller’s description, and a gun which the caller identified
• acknowledging that a defendant in a supervised release revocation proceeding has \a limited confrontation right under Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.1(b)(2)(C)\
• noting that, when determining whether to admit hearsay testimony under Rule 32.1(b)(2)(C), \a court should consider . . . the government's reason for declining to produce the declarant\
• noting that 911 caller never changed his account of the events
• relying upon the fact that officers located a gun the declarant stated was used in the attack to bolster the statement’s reliability

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).