FREEMAN

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (21 total)

• D.J.G. v. State, 524 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
  …sillier than to insist that the jury is compelled to believe all that testimony which the witness offered in explanation of an intentional killing on his part?” Id., at 636. Accord United States v. Freeman, 302 F. 2d 347 (2d Cir.1962), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 958, 84 S.Ct. 448, 11 L.Ed.2d 316 (1963); Dill v. Scuka, M.D., 279 F. 2d 145 (3rd Cir.1960); O’Shea v. Jewel Tea Co., Inc., 233 F. 2d 530, 535 (7th Cir.1956). In summary, Florida has retained the common law rule which held that a party calling a witnes…
• United States v. Silverman, 430 F.2d 106 (2d Cir. 1970)
  …States v. Brill, supra, may be brought out on direct examination, provided the jury is cautioned that the testimony is not evidence of the defendant’s guilt. As we stated in United States v. Freeman, 302 F. 2d 347, 350 (2d Cir. 1962), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 958, 84 S.Ct. 448, 11 L.Ed.2d 316 (1963): “There may be circumstances where, on proper request of the defense, the trial judge should limit, or even bar such testimony, or allow it only under cautionary instructions because of the witness’ admission of…
• United States v. Palumbo, 401 F.2d 270 (2d Cir. 1968)
  …n of a defendant “every accusation of criminal or vicious- conduct will further the search for truth.” See United States v. Provoo, 215 F. 2d 531, 536-537 (2d Cir. 1954); cf. United States v. Freeman, 302 F. 2d 347, 350 (2d Cir. 1962), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 958, 84 S.Ct. 448, 11 L.Ed.2d 316 (1963) ; United States v. Tomaiolo, 249 F. 2d 683, 687-690 (2d Cir. 1957); United States v. Schiller, 187 F. 2d 572, 576 (2d Cir. 1951) (Frank, J., concurring). We have long held that with any potentially prejudicial…