United States v. Thos. Wm. Hall

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “it is error for a trial court to exclude evidence from which a jury could rea- sonably infer that the witness has a motive to testify in a certain manner”
• concluding that the trial court’s exclusion of defendant’s proffered impeachment evidence was not harmless because “the jury did not have information that was relevant to whether [the witness] had motive to fabricate her allegations against defendant”
• holding that the defendant laid a sufficient foundation for the admission of evidence that the victim, who was not a United States citizen, had applied for a U visa on the ground that she had been abused
• holding 6 the fact of a U-Visa “was relevant impeachment evidence” and its exclusion was not 7 harmless error
• applying that rule in the context of “information that 5 As we explained in Harper v. Washburn, 308 Or App 244, 249 n 1, 479 P3d 1101 (2020
• declining to address the exclusion of impeachment evidence because “the record may develop differently on remand”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).