United States v. Roy Allen Pacheco

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a child victim’s statements to physicians were admissible under 803(4) where defendant presented no evidence that child did not understand the need to be truthful, and child was subject to cross-examination
• holding that a child victim’s statements to physicians were admissible under 803(4) where defendant presented no evidence that child did not understand the need to be truthful, and child was subject to cross-examination
• \Pacheco has not pointed to any actual evidence indicating that [five-year-old child-declarant] did not understand she was being examined by doctors and needed to be truthful in her discussions with them.\
• “Pacheco has not pointed to any actual evidence indicating that [five-year- old child-declarant] did not understand she was being examined by doctors and needed to be truthful in her discussions with them.”
• “[A] district court has the discretion to determine in a particular case whether the jury should be specially instructed regarding the credibility of a child witness and, if so, the nature of that instruction.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).