Legal Opinion

United States v. Vincent R. Davis

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided October 15, 1999No. 98-6251PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

BECKER, Chief Judge.

The Slip Opinion in the above case filed July 19, 1999 is hereby amended as follows:

On page 39 of the slip opinion, second full paragraph, first line, replace: “Inquiry into the first two incidents was clearly proper, because they went to Davis’s truthfulness. See Deary v. City of Gloucester, 9 F.3d 191 (1st Cir.1993) (questions about an incident in which a police officer witness had been disciplined for untruthfulness were appropriate under Rule 608(b)).”

with: “Inquiry into the facts underlying the first two incidents was clearly proper, because they…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Deary v. City of GloucesterCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. William P. Becker v. Arco Chemical Company, in No. 98-1636 William P. Becker v. Arco Chemical Company, William P. Becker, in No. 98-1888Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
  2. Wagner v. Georgetown University Medical CenterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
  3. United States v. Pierre Dawson and Alphonso IngramCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2006
  4. United States v. Daniel DvorkinCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2015
  5. People v. KnightColorado Court of Appeals · 2006

20 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