Legal Opinion

Gaffney v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided September 17, 2009No. 04-CF-1103PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GLICKMAN, Associate Judge:

Appellant Dewayne Gaffney challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction for perjury before the grand jury. We agree that, under the special “two-witness” rule applicable to perjury prosecutions, the evidence was insufficient. On that ground, we reverse appellant’s conviction. 1

Appellant was indicted on two counts of perjury for statements he made under oath before a Superior Court grand jury investigating the murder of Michael Taylor. The target of the investigation, Harry Wheeler, was suspected of having ordered Taylor’s murder in retaliation…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Opper v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
  2. Bronston v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Weiler v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  4. United States v. Robert ChestmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
  5. Frendak v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court v. HannNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Smith v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
  3. Tawanda Sheffield, Steven D. Lewis, and Allen Butler v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2015
  4. Darius Brown and Jamal Shepherd v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
  5. Dreck Wilson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2018

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