ROBSON

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Cong. of Indus. Orgs. v. McADORY, 325 U.S. 472 (U.S. 1945)
  …ted to that court for decision, we are without jurisdiction to consider it in the first instance here. Caperton v. Bowyer, 14 Wall. 216, 236; Hulbert v. Chicago, 202 U. S. 275, 280, 281; Dorrance v. Pennsylvania, 287 U. S. 660; Chandler v. Manifold, 290 U. S. 665; see also Flournoy v. Wiener, 321 U. S. 253; Charleston Assn. v. Alderson, 324 U. S. 182, 185, and cases cited. We find no other factual differences calling for comment between the case presented by the record here and that presented in the Alabama…
• United States v. Lewis, 433 F.2d 1146 (D.C. Cir. 1970)
  …in original). . Dobbins v. United States, supra note 10, 81 U.S.App.D.C. at 221, 157 F. 2d at 260; Sacks v. Sacks, 75 U.S.App.D.C. 165, 124 F. 2d 527 (1942). And see Dickerson v. United States, 62 App.D.C. 191, 194, 65 F. 2d 824, 827, cert. denied, 290 U.S. 665, 54 S.Ct. 89, 78 L.Ed. 575 (1933). . To resolve issues of this type, a preliminary examination of the spouse-witness, out of the presence of the jury, is wholly in order. Sacks v. Sacks, supra note 21. . See Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1, 6…
• United States v. Burks, 470 F.2d 432 (D.C. Cir. 1972)
  …noncommunicative acts, United States v. Lewis, supra, and a communication otherwise privileged loses its privileged character on coming into the hands of a third party, Dicker [*437] son v. United States, 62 App.D.C. 191, 65 F. 2d 824, cert. denied, 290 U.S. 665, 54 S.Ct. 89, 78 L.Ed. 575 (1933). Under either of these doctrines, the confidential communications privilege would not apply to Mrs. Price’s testimony about her husband’s beating to death their own child. And if counsel for defendant would have q…