Nassif v. District of Columbia
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
HOOD, Chief Judge.
In a trial without a jury appellant was found guilty on a charge of indecent exposure. After the government had pre-' sented its case, which consisted of the testimony of the arresting officer, appellant’s counsel announced that he would call a Mrs. Rodriguez as a witness for appellant. At this point the court stated: “If the defendant is going to testify, I want him to testify before this witness.’’ Counsel replied that appellant might not testify, saying: “I actually haven’t made up my mind as to that at this time.” The court then stated: “I will not permit you to call her…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bell v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1888
- Clemons v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1893
- Coupe v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1940
- Coombs v. CoombsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1929
3Cited by5 opinions
- Brooks v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Miller v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1969
- Hampton v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1970
- Jones v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1968
- Nassif v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1966