ALSTON

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (41 total)

• Allie v. Ionata, 503 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 1987)
  …Id. 227 N.E. 2d at 63); see generally Ind.Rules of Procedure, Trial Rule 41(B).3 [*1242] See also Ellingson v. Burlington Northern, Inc., 653 F. 2d 1327, 1330, n. 3 (9th Cir.1981) (citing Mathis v. Laird, 457 F. 2d 926, 927 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 871, 93 S.Ct. 201, 34 L.Ed.2d 122 (1972)); Williamson v. Columbia Gas & Electric Corp., 186 F. 2d 464 (3d Cir.1950), cert. denied, 341 U.S. 921, 71 S.Ct. 743, 95 L.Ed. 1355 (1951). In Florida, our state counterpart to Federal Rule 41(b) is Florida Rule…
• State v. Hassberger, 350 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1977)
  …he defendant, as long as the cross-examination is otherwise vigorous, full and effective. Almost never, however, is the State privileged to withhold the witness’ real identity.7 In United States v. Alston, 460 F. 2d 48 (5th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 871, 93 S.Ct. 200, 34 L.Ed.2d 122 (1972), the court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to order a federal narcotics agent to divulge his current home address on the witness stand, because the accused had had sufficient op…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Blanco v. State, 353 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
  …ngness to testify in that proceeding, the present address of the witness may "be withheld from the defendant as long as the cross-examination is otherwise vigorous, full and effective. See U. S. v. Alston, 460 F. 2d 48 (5th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 871, 93 S.Ct. 200, 34 L.Ed.2d 122 (1972). However, prior to effectively invoking this “personal safety” exception, the prosecution must demonstrate an actual, not implied, threat to the witness or his family and must disclose to the trial judge in camer…