Legal Opinion

United States v. Marshall

U S Air Force Court of Military Review

Decided August 28, 1990No. ACM 27820PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION

KASTL, Senior Judge:

This appeal centers on a rule of evidence — co-conspirator statements under Mil.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E). As the military judge explained at trial, the evidentiary contest grew out of “a classical case of admission of a statement of a co-conspirator in furtherance of a conspiracy and while a conspiracy is still ongoing.”

We find no error on the particular facts before us and affirm.

Statements of Co-Conspirators

A

The appellant, Staff Sergeant Marshall, was convicted in Panama of various drug-related offenses in violation of Articles 81 and 112a, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 881,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Bourjaily v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. United States v. InadiSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. United States v. David SilvermanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
  4. United States v. RosserUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979
  5. United States v. Riad Youssef RahmeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. United States v. EvansU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1990
  2. United States v. RomanoUnited States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals · 1995
  3. United States v. KilbourneU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1990

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API