Legal Opinion
United States v. Ward
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided April 7, 1949No. 197, Docket 21253PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
1. Defendant claims that the statement taken by the F. B. I. agent was inadmissible, because the agent admitted eliminating from the statement whatever he thought immaterial. But the agent testified that he read the statement, as he had written it, to the defendant, and that the defendant signed the statement. If any material part was eliminated, defendant had an opportunity to cross examine the agent or to introduce the omitted part. It was for the jury to determine the weight to be given the statement in the light of whatever the evidence showed about its completeness.
2.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Armit v. LovelandCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1940
- Vanadium Corp. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of MarylandCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
- Wilson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1944
- Russell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1941
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- United States v. RosenbergCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1952
- Moran v. Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
- Dit La Porte v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962
- Emil Yaich v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
- United States v. Albert H. HolmesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1968
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.