JOHNSON

v.

NEW YORK

Citator

Cited By (57 total)

• United States v. DeLUNA, 763 F.2d 897 (8th Cir. 1985)
  …wever, that the proffered testimony would have been subject to substantial damaging impeachment, particularly from the Mario Tape itself and other government evidence. See United States v. Finkelstein, 526 F. 2d 517, 524 (2d Cir.1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 960, 96 S.Ct. 1742, 48 L.Ed.2d 205 (1976). We have carefully reviewed the record and are convinced that, although the question is a close one, the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to [*921] grant Thomas’ motion for severance on th…
• United States v. Al Taylor, 562 F.2d 1345 (2d Cir. 1977)
  …pparently under witness protection in other cases that he had gotten to know.” Thus the door had been left at least ajar by the defense for the prosecutor’s question. See United States v. Finkelstein, 526 F. 2d 517, 527 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 960, 96 S.Ct. 1742, 48 L.Ed.2d 205 (1976); United States v. Tramunti, supra, 513 F. 2d at 1118; United States v. Cirillo, 468 F. 2d 1233, 1240 (2d Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 989, 93 S.Ct. 1501, 36 L.Ed.2d 188 (1973). Wesley also argues that que…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States v. Aristedes Drougas, 748 F.2d 8 (1st Cir. 1984)
  …ing impeachment; (3) assess the counter arguments of judicial economy; and (4) give weight to the timeliness of the motion. United States v. Butler, 611 F. 2d at 1071; United States v. Finkelstein, 526 F. 2d 517, 523-24 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 960, 96 S.Ct. 1742, 48 L.Ed.2d 205 (1976). See also United States v. Smolar, 557 F. 2d 13, 21 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 966, 98 S.Ct. 508, 54 L.Ed.2d 453 (1977). In this case the government had clearly outlined the nature of its proof in tw…