Julius L. Worthy v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1DissentBeckwith, Associate Judge
The government in this case sought to admit a prior statement of Alexsandra Green to Detective Derek Bell the day of the incident that was consistent with certain statements she made in the grand jury two weeks after the incident that the government wanted the trial court to. credit as true. The government’s theory of relevance for this prior consistent statement was that it “rehabilitated” Ms. Green after she was impeached with an inconsistent statement made to Detective Ricks a day after the incident. And the government’s theory for why the prior consistent statement rehabilitated her —…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Tome v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- United States v. Peter SimonelliCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001
- McClain v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- Morten v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
- In Re Ty. B.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.