BACA

v.

COLORADO

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Dardi, 330 F.2d 316 (2d Cir. 1964)
  …lf to read both transcripts “for the purpose of finding out whether there is any material or relevant qualifying or explanatory context of the questions and answers * * * used.” In United States v. Stone, 282 F. 2d 547, 552 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 928, 81 S.Ct. 353, 5 L.Ed.2d 266 (1960), this Court affirmed the proposition that “when the prosecution uses testimony of a defendant before the grand jury, the defendant must be allowed to inspect it.” See United States v. Cotter, 60 F. 2d 689 (2 Cir.)…
• Redwing Carriers, Inc. v. Tomlinson, 399 F.2d 652 (5th Cir. 1968)
  …United States v. Correll, 1967, 389 U.S. 299, 88 S.Ct. 445, 19 L.Ed.2d 537, 543; Fribourg Nav. Co. v. Commissioner, 1966, 383 U.S. 272, 283, 86 S.Ct. 862, 868, 15 L.Ed.2d 751, 758. In Vitter v. United States, 5 Cir. 1960, 279 F. 2d 445, cert. den., 364 U.S. 928, 81 S.Ct. 353, 5 L.Ed.2d 266, Judge Brown, speaking for our Court, articulated this rule of construction as follows: “When a Treasury Regulation interprets a section of the Code and the Regulation remains in effect and un [*657] changed for a long…
• United States v. The Southland Corp. & S. Richmond Dole & Eugene Mastropieri, 760 F.2d 1366 (2d Cir. 1985)
  …ing’ of the admitted portion.” United States v. Marin, 669 F. 2d 73, 84 (2 Cir. 1982). This is a principle of simple fairness, long antedating the Federal Rules of Evidence, see United States v. Stone, 282 F. 2d 547, 551-52 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 928, 81 S.Ct. 353, 5 L.Ed.2d 266 (1960) (also involving refusal to admit a portion of a defendant’s grand jury testimony). The district judge was in error in relying on Marin as a basis for exclusion; there the excluded portion related to a subject th…