VASILIOS

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (20 total)

• United States v. Harris, 761 F.2d 394 (7th Cir. 1985)
  …this matter are relevant to whether the impeaching statements really were inconsistent within the context of the interview, and if so, to what extent. See Rubin, 609 F. 2d at 70; United States v. Baron, 602 F. 2d 1248, 1252 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 967, 100 S.Ct. 456, 62 L.Ed.2d 380 (1979). This rehabilitative use of prior consistent statements is also in accord with the principle of completeness promoted by Rule 106. See Rubin, 609 F. 2d at 70; Baron, 602 F. 2d at 1252. See also, Juarez, 549 F.…
• United States v. Howard "Sonny" Hawkins, 661 F.2d 436 (5th Cir. 1981)
  …e(d)(2) (emphasis supplied). . United States v. Ramirez, 622 F. 2d 898, 899 (5th Cir. 1980). See also Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 94 S.Ct. 1105, 39 L.Ed.2d 347 (1974). . United States v. Vasilios, 598 F. 2d 387, 390-91 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 967, 100 S.Ct. 456, 62 L.Ed.2d 380 (1979). . Reed testified during cross-examination: Q. Have you violated the conditions of your parole since you were released in March of ’78 [sic]? A. No sir. Q. Have you left the country without permission since t…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States v. Sterling Hamilton, 689 F.2d 1262 (6th Cir. 1982)
  …implication reflected in the questioning of other defense counsel too. A wide variety of circuits have held that a charge of recent fabrication or improper motive need not be express. U. S. v. Baron, 602 F. 2d 1248, 1253 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 967, 100 S.Ct. 456, 62 L.Ed.2d 380 (1979), and cases cited therein. The Baron Court even provided that “[t]he fact that defense counsel may not have intended to imply that [defendant’s] story was fabricated [recently] is irrelevant if that inference fai…