United States v. William Gene Eaton

How courts have described this case

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

• “[Prior inconsistent statements] are admissible only to impeach or discredit the witness, and are not competent substantive evidence of the facts to which the former statements relate.” (citing Brooks v. United States, 309 F.2d 580 (10th Cir. 1962))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).