HOSKINS

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (38 total)

• United States v. Caporale, 806 F.2d 1487 (11th Cir. 1986)
  …reliability, which may be inferred if the statement falls within a “firmly rooted hearsay exception.” Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, 66, 100 S.Ct. 2531, 2539, 65 L.Ed.2d 597 (1980); Williams v. Melton, 733 F. 2d 1492, 1496 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1073, 105 S.Ct. 567, 83 L.Ed.2d 508 (1984); United States v. Peacock, supra, 654 F. 2d at 349. Milano, Sr., was deceased at the time of the trial and therefore clearly unavailable. Furthermore, as discussed above, the statements bear adequate indicia of…
• United States v. Basey, 816 F.2d 980 (5th Cir. 1987)
  …ng "the Bruton rule is not violated unless a codefendant’s statement directly alludes to the complaining defendant," “even if the evidence makes it apparent that the defendant was implicated by some indirect references”; citing cases), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1073, 105 S.Ct. 565, 83 L.Ed.2d 506 (1985); United States v. Warren, 578 F. 2d 1058, 1075 n. 15 (5th Cir.1978) (weighing degree to which statement implicated defendant and whether statement was crucial to government’s case), rev’d in part on other ground…
• United States v. Espinoza-Seanez, 862 F.2d 526 (5th Cir. 1988)
  …ations omitted). This is true, even if the evidence makes it apparent that the defendant was implicated by some indirect references.” United States v. Webster, 734 F. 2d 1048, 1054 n. 6 (5th Cir.1984), cert. denied sub nom. Hoskins v. United States, 469 U.S. 1073, 105 S.Ct. 565, 83 L.Ed.2d 506 (1984). See also United States v. Heffington, 682 F. 2d 1075, 1083 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied sub nom. Giella v. United States, 459 U.S. 1108, 103 S.Ct. 734, 74 L.Ed.2d 957 (1983); United States v. Castro, 596 F. 2d…