Legal Opinion
United States v. Fuat Yildiz, Also Known as Frankie, Also Known as Frank Lnu
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided January 8, 2004No. 02-1572PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Per curiam
Fuat Yildiz here appeals his conviction for violating the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (1994). The majority of Yildiz’s arguments are addressed in a contemporaneous summary order. We write separately, however, to affirm the common law rule that a government agent’s out-of-court statements are not admissible for their truth in a criminal prosecution as admissions by a party opponent. See United States v. Santos, 372 F.2d 177, 180-81 (2d Cir.1967).
Background
Yildiz was convicted of conspiring to rob jewelry merchants in New Jersey with members of what he calls the “Russian Mafia.” A substantial…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. AbelSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Tome v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Richard M. Lippay v. Dean C. Christos Commonwealth of Pa. Dean C. ChristosCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- United States v. William Peter KampilesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1980
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bellamy v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
- United States v. GanadonegroDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2012
- United States v. BordaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- United States v. BagchoDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- United States v. AleynikovDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2011
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.