United States v. Vernard L. Green, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• relying on FRE 803(5) and FRE 801(d)(2)(A) to conclude that a police summary of an interview containing statements by the defendant could be introduced as a police officer’s recorded recollection of the interview
• relying on FRE 803(5) and FRE 801(d)(2)(A) to conclude that a police summary of an interview containing statements by the defendant could be introduced as a police officer’s recorded recollection of the interview
• drug sales ending 14 months before the charged crime are relevant to the matter at issue
• drug sales ending 14 months before the charged crime are relevant to the matter at issue
• “Rule 801(d)(1)(B) does not bar the introduction of a prior consistent statement through the testimony of someone other than the declarant, so long as the declarant is available for cross-examination about the statement at some time during trial.”
• “Rule 801(d)(1)(B) does not bar the introduction of a prior consistent statement through the testimony of someone other than the declarant, so long as the declarant is available for cross-examination about the statement at some time during trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).