Legal Opinion

Andre Holmon v. District of Columbia

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided February 28, 2019No. 15-CT-335PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ruiz, Senior Judge:

*515 This appeal requires us to consider the application of evidentiary principles of hearsay to the admissibility of evidence obtained from a cellphone and the use of such evidence as proof of criminal contempt for violating a civil protection order ("CPO") that prohibited appellant from having contact with a specific person. We conclude that the trial court properly admitted evidence from that person's cellphone regarding appellant's calls, and that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the trial court's finding that appellant's conduct of calling the specified person's…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. United States v. YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Rivas v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
  5. Hunter v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. District of Columbia v. BongamDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2022
  2. Francis v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2021
  3. In re CurtisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2022
  4. In re Timothy MooreDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2022
  5. Isaiah A. Green v. Commonwealth of VirginiaCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2020

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

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

Powered by the Exa API