United States v. Whitmore, Gerald F.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding opinion and reputation evidence attacking the credibility of a witness under Rules 608(a) and 403
• holding that evidentiary error was not harmless where the defendant was precluded from challenging the character for truthfulness of the “sole and critical eye- witness” and the corroborating evidence was minimal
• holding that evidentiary 3 error was not harmless where the defendant was precluded from challenging the 4 character for truthfulness of the “sole and critical eye-witness” and the corroborating 5 evidence was minimal
• noting that the defendant \defended on the ground that [the witness] had fabricated the story\
• noting that Rule 608(b) prohibits extrinsic evidence on cross-examination and thus the cross-examiner is “stuck with whatever response” the witness gives
• noting that Morrison “did not address what difference it might have made had the defendant sought to cross-examine the witness about the substance of the complaint”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).