Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Kimes v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided October 31, 1989No. 86-1267Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSchwelb, Associate Judge

At 1:30 p.m. on July 18, 1985, according to her own submission, Mrs. Kimes was in Arlington, Virginia rather than in or near the courtroom, as ordered by the judge. Shortly thereafter, she was brushed by a car and hospitalized for several hours. Although the hospital records describe her as shaken but nevertheless “oriented as to month, year, name, and place,” she never called the court or her attorney’s office. That evening, she left the hospital and, instead of reporting to the court, flew to California without notifying any person connected with the trial of her departure. Three days…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Snyder v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  3. Rose v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Kentucky v. StincerSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  5. Diaz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912

30 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