Legal Opinion
United States v. Hammond
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 15, 1996No. 94-CO-1411, 94-CO-1412PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SCHWELB, Associate Judge:
The United States has appealed from several evidentiary rulings in which the trial judge redacted portions of various statements offered against appellees Hammond and Wright under the exception to the hearsay rule for declarations against penal interest. The proffered statements were made by the appellees’ former co-defendants, and the redacted portions refer to the alleged criminal conduct of third parties, including Hammond and Wright. The government contends that the trial judge erroneously interpreted Williamson v. United States, 512 U.S. 594, 114 S.Ct. 2431, 129…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Williamson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States v. Robert Sasso, Jr., and Anthony ArmientiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Laumer v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- United States v. Charles H. Kehm, Iii, and Steven M. GreenbergCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- United States v. John R. Barletta, in Re United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1981
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Lilly v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Thomas v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- Hammond v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- Harrison v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
- Doret v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.