Legal Opinion

Jordan v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided October 21, 1993No. 92-CF-768PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEADMAN, Associate Judge:

In the course of appellant’s trial for first-degree murder and related offenses, four government witnesses indicated in cross-examination before the jury that they had given statements to investigating officers of a type arguably covered by the Jencks Act 1 but not furnished by the government to defense counsel. In each instance, following voir dire by the trial court outside the presence of the jury, the trial court concluded that no Jencks statements had been shown to in fact exist. The principal issue on this appeal is whether the trial court abused its discretion…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Jencks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Geders v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Quercia v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  4. Palermo v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  5. United States v. AugenblickSupreme Court of the United States · 1969

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Porter v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
  2. McClellan v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
  3. Seivewright v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Daye v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
  5. Dancy v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000

4 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