STRAHL

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (58 total)

• United States v. Patterson, 644 F.2d 890 (1st Cir. 1981)
  …, 333 U.S. 364, 395, 68 S.Ct. 525, 542, 92 L.Ed. 746 (1948) (clearly erroneous standard applied in review of district court’s finding of no conspiracy in civil antitrust case); United States v. Strahl, 590 F. 2d 10, 13 (1st Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 918, 99 S.Ct. 1237, 59 L.Ed.2d 468 (1979) (clearly erroneous standard applied to district court’s finding of fact on Jencks Act issue); United States v. Botero, 589 F. 2d 430, 433 (9th Cir. 1978) (clearly erroneous standard applied to district court’s f…
• United States v. Flaherty, 668 F.2d 566 (1st Cir. 1981)
  …osure of Gunschel’s perjury and the inconsistent statements of Farrell and Sullivan. In evaluating a challenge to the timing of disclosure, we must make a two-step inquiry. See United States v. Strahl, 590 F. 2d 10, 13 (1st Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 918, 99 S.Ct. 1237, 59 L.Ed.2d 468 (1979). First, we must determine whether the disclosed evidence was material within the meaning of the appropriate Agurs standard because, if it were not, even its nondisclosure would not be reversible error. If the e…
• United States v. Cintolo, 818 F.2d 980 (1st Cir. 1987)
  …does not stray entirely beyond the pale.” United States v. Tierney, 760 F. 2d at 388. See also Moreno Morales, supra; United States v. Marler, 756 F. 2d 206, 217 (1st Cir.1985); United States v. Strahl, 590 F. 2d 10, 12 (1st Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 918, 99 S.Ct. 1237, 59 L.Ed.2d 468 (1979). Absent an abuse of discretion, a district court’s determination of admissibility under Fed.R.Evid. 403 will not be disturbed on appeal. United States v. Gonsalves, 668 F. 2d 73, 75 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 456…