United States v. Vincent R. Davis
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
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
- Deary v. City of GloucesterCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
3Cited by25 opinions
- 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
- Wagner v. Georgetown University Medical CenterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- United States v. Pierre Dawson and Alphonso IngramCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2006
- United States v. Daniel DvorkinCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2015
- People v. KnightColorado Court of Appeals · 2006
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.