Legal Opinion
United States v. Torrez-Ortega
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided July 1, 1999No. 97-8094, 97-8095, 97-8096PublishedCited by 48 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LUCERO, Circuit Judge.
This direct appeal of appellants’ convictions for conspiracy to violate federal drug laws presents several issues, one of which is precedential in this circuit. We must decide whether a witness who asserts an illegitimate claim of privilege, and essentially refuses to answer questions at trial, is available and subject to cross-examination within the meaning of the Confrontation Clause and Rule 801(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Such a witness, we conclude, is not sufficiently available for cross-examination to satisfy the requirements of the Confrontation…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- United States v. Gurmeet Singh DhinsaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- United States v. ChanthadaraCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Jose Luis Gonzalez-FloresCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Damien Preston v. Superintendent Graterford SCICourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
- United States v. CherryCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.