Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Scheffer

Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Decided September 18, 1996No. 95-0521; Crim.App. No. 30304Published

1DissentCrawford, Judge

We have held that “[t]he defendant has the right to present legally and logically relevant evidence at trial.” United States v. Woolheater, 40 MJ 170, 173 (CMA 1994). But as all the Judges of this Court agreed in Wool-heater, this is “not [an] absolute” right, id.; see also Montana v. Egelhoff, — U.S. —, —, —, 116 S.Ct. 2013, 2017, 2026, 135 L.Ed.2d 361 (1996); and may yield to valid “policy considerations,” 40 MJ at 173; id.; United States v. Bins, 43 MJ 79, 84 (1995) (citing Woolheater, 40 MJ at 173); United States v. Schaible, 11 USCMA 107, 111, 28 CMR 331, 335 (1960).

None of the cases…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
  3. Patterson v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. Bank of Nova Scotia v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Montana v. EgelhoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1996

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API