CHAVEZ-CHAPULA

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (22 total)

• United States v. Sampol, 636 F.2d 621 (D.C. Cir. 1980)
  …Cañete was not the key witness for the government, and the sensitive nature of the subject matter, we cannot say that the trial judge exceeded the boundaries of his discretion. See United States v. Kizer, 569 F. 2d 504 (9th Cir. 1978), cert. denied 435 U.S. 976, 98 S.Ct. 1626, 56 L.Ed.2d 71; United States v. Banks, supra; United States v. Holt, 529 F. 2d 981 (4th Cir. 1975); United States v. Davis, 486 F. 2d 725 (7th Cir. 1973), [*668] cert. denied 415 U.S. 979, 94 S.Ct. 1569, 39 L.Ed.2d 876. VIII THE DE…
• United States v. Tutino, 883 F.2d 1125 (2d Cir. 1989)
  …NO’S MOTION TO APPEAR AS CO-COUNSEL This Court has held that a criminal defendant has no constitutional or statutory right to represent himself as co-counsel with his own attorney. Ennis v. LeFevre, 560 F. 2d 1072, 1075 (2d Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 976, 98 S.Ct. 1625, 56 L.Ed.2d 70 (1978); United States v. Cyphers, 556 F. 2d 630, 634 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 972, 97 S.Ct. 2937, 53 L.Ed.2d 1070 (1977). The decision to grant or deny “hybrid representation” lies solely within the discretio…
• Ozzie Batchelor v. Hoyt C. Cupp, 693 F.2d 859 (9th Cir. 1982)
  …he crime. The Sixth Amendment guarantees an accused the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses. Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 94 S.Ct. 1105, 39 L.Ed.2d 347 (1974); United States v. Kizer, 569 F. 2d 504, 505 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 976, 98 S.Ct. 1626, 56 L.Ed.2d 71 (1978). Yet trial courts have broad discretion in limiting the scope of cross-examination, especially where the Sixth Amendment interest may conflict with the danger of harassing witnesses or unduly prejudicing the jury…