Legal Opinion
Hill v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 31, 1988No. 85-1682PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TERRY, Associate Judge:
Appellant was convicted of distributing phenmetrazine, in violation of D.C.Code § 33-541(a)(l) (1987 Supp.). He contends on appeal that the identification of him by a single eyewitness — an undercover police officer — was insufficient to permit his case to go to the jury. He also argues that the trial court committed plain error by permitting a non-expert witness to testify about the practices of police officers and narcotics traffickers. We reject both contentions and affirm appellant’s conviction.
I
Viewed in the light most favorable to the government, 1 the evidence…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Watts v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1976
- Jefferson Crawford v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- Byrd v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
- Crawley v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1974
- Smith v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Nelson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
- Gibson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
- Beatty v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Gethers v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- Carter v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.