Laumer v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
NEWMAN, Chief Judge:
On this appeal, we are asked to consider whether declarations against penal interest should be admissible in evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule in this jurisdiction. Concluding that they should, we remand for a new evidentiary hearing and for a ruling on whether the excluded statements meet the standards for admissibility that we adopt herein. 1 In Part I, we set forth the relevant evidence and trial proceedings. In Part II, we discuss the declaration against penal interest exception and adopt that exception as formulated in Fed. R.Evid. 804(b)(3) for this…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited60 opinions
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- California v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- United States v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Opper v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by111 opinions
- Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- State v. BryantSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Patton v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- Martin v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
- State v. RosadoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
106 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.