United States v. Townley

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding records from the National Crime Information Center Database were sufficient to establish the existence of the prior convictions where appellant did not present any contradictory evidence
• noting that Shepard “was concerned . . . with what documents can be used to prove the facts underlying a conviction where the elements of the state crime do not precisely mirror the federal definition” (quotation marks omitted)
• “Although a district court’s evidentiary rulings are reviewed for abuse of discretion, whether admission of such evidence violates the Confrontation Clause is reviewed de novo.”
• “We find no merit to Appellant’s unfounded and unsupported contention that Crawford’s instruction on testimonial hearsay somehow eviscerated Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E), especially since Rule 801(d)(2)(E
• noting circuit’s strong preference for James hearings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).