SCHLICHER

v.

ROCHE ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (66 total)

• United States v. Feldman, 788 F.2d 544 (9th Cir. 1986)
  …316, 94 S.Ct. 1105, 1110, 39 L.Ed.2d 347 (1974). We will uphold a district court’s decision on the extent of cross-examination unless it constitutes an abuse of discretion. United States v. Kennedy, 714 F. 2d 968, 973 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1034, 104 S.Ct. 1305, 79 L.Ed.2d 704 (1984). A defendant’s constitutional right to cross-examination is limited to issues relevant to the trial. Id. However, a restriction of cross-examination may still be error if sufficiently prejudicial. See United St…
• United States v. Nesbitt, 852 F.2d 1502 (7th Cir. 1988)
  …nce before a judicial officer” to mean the defendant’s initial appearance before a judicial officer. See, e.g., United States v. Owokoniran, 840 F. 2d 373, 374 (7th Cir.1987); United States v. Wilson, 720 F. 2d 608, 609 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1034, 104 S.Ct. 1304, 79 L.Ed.2d 703 (1984). Notwithstanding these statutory time limits, certain periods of delay are specifically excludable from both the seventy and thirty-day time periods under section 3161(h). Nesbitt’s initial argument is that §…
• United States v. Dennis, 786 F.2d 1029 (11th Cir. 1986)
  …at closing argument (to which no objection was made at trial), impermissibly bolstered the [*1046] credibility of the witnesses whose plea agreements were introduced.17 In United States v. Sims, 719 F. 2d 375, 377-78 (11th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1034, 104 S.Ct. 1304, 79 L.Ed.2d 703 (1984), we considered and rejected a similar claim. We held that the government had not improperly vouched for the veracity of a testifying co-conspirator by introducing the terms of the witness’ plea agreement and re…