Legal Opinion

United States v. White

U S Air Force Court of Military Review

Decided February 24, 1984No. ACM 24046PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION

KASTL, Senior Judge:

Evidentiary questions are before us concerning residual hearsay and eyewitness testimony after an unnecessarily suggestive identification process. We reverse as to the residual hearsay and find the identification process permissible in this case.

I

We consider first the matter of residual hearsay under Mil.R.Evid. 804(b)(5). The salient facts are these: Senior Airman Edward White was charged with making a household goods claim which was false in the amount of $3,665.00; the sum was claimed for loss of sterling silverware during his transfer from Aviano Air Base,…

2Cases cited59 opinions

  1. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Neil v. BiggersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Manson v. BrathwaiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. United States v. HarrisU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1984
  2. United States v. WhitneyU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1984
  3. United States v. WilliamsU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1987
  4. United States v. HinesU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1984
  5. United States v. HughesUnited States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API