United States v. Willie Calhoun, A/K/A Calvin Calhoun

How courts have described this case

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

• reversing because parole officer, whose occupation was not identified to the jury, could not be adequately cross-examined
• where the court excluded the identification testimony of the defendant’s parole officer because the scope of cross-examination was restricted by virtue of the defendant’s desire not to disclose to the jury the fact that the lay witness was the defendant’s parole officer
• where the court excluded the identification testimony of the defendant's parole officer because the scope of cross-examination was restricted by virtue of the defendant's desire not to disclose to the jury the fact that the lay witness was the defendant's parole officer
• “The knowledge that [a defendant] was on parole at the time of the alleged offense could also arouse an emotional reaction among the jurors, especially those who harbor strong feelings about recidivism and the premature release of those in prison for crimes.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).