PARKER SEAL CO.

v.

CUMMINS

Citator

Cited By

• Holmes v. State, 557 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
  …on cross-examination concerning the victim’s current setting. Some courts have taken a very specific approach where the witness involved is the victim and key witness to a rape. In McGrath v. Vinzant, 528 F. 2d 681 (1st Cir.1976), cert. dismissed, 426 U.S. 902, 96 S.Ct. 2221, 48 L.Ed.2d 827 (1976), the court was faced with a situation where the key witness was the victim of a kidnapping, rape and assault with a dangerous weapon. When counsel for the defense sought to elicit the address of the witness, the…
• United States v. Estrella, 567 F.2d 1151 (1st Cir. 1977)
  …rest in encouraging the flow of information, see Roviaro, supra, and the informant’s private interest in his own safety. See United States v. Picard, 464 F. 2d 215, 217 (1st Cir. 1972); cf. McGrath v. Vinzant, 528 F. 2d 681 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 902, 96 S.Ct. 2221, 48 L.Ed.2d 827 (1976). Alicea manifestly has failed to meet his burden here. The informant neither dealt directly with Alicea in'any manner, see United States v. Kelly, 449 F. 2d 329, 330 (9th Cir. 1971), nor was he a significant pa…
• United States v. Cavallaro, 553 F.2d 300 (2d Cir. 1977)
  …r. Further, where the witness is the victim of a kidnapping and the defendants are at large [*305] on bail, as was true here, the possibility of foul play is obvious. See, e. g., McGrath v. Vinzant, 528 F. 2d 681, 683-85 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 426 U.S. 902, 96 S.Ct. 2221, 48 L.Ed.2d 827 (1976). In contrast, the defense not only failed to show any “particularized need” to question Shepardson regarding her current address, see United States v. Persico, supra, 425 F. 2d at 1383, but defense counsel appea…