United States v. Marshall
U S Air Force Court of Military Review
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
- Bourjaily v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- United States v. InadiSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. David SilvermanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- United States v. RosserUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979
- 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
- United States v. EvansU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1990
- United States v. RomanoUnited States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals · 1995
- United States v. KilbourneU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1990