GOMETZ

v.

UNITED STATES; FOUNTAIN V. UNITED STATES; AND SILVERSTEIN V. UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Nesbitt, 852 F.2d 1502 (7th Cir. 1988)
  …n without making some plausible explanation of the assistance he would have received from the testimony of the deported witnesses.” 458 U.S. at 871, 102 S.Ct. at 3448.17 See United States v. Fountain, 768 F. 2d 790, 796 (7th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1124, 106 S.Ct. 1647, 90 L.Ed.2d 191 (1986) (“testimony that could not reasonably be expected to make a difference to the outcome of the trial is not necessary” to an adequate defense under Fed.R.Crim.P. 17(b)); Sharlow v. Israel, 767 F. 2d 373, 377 (7th…
• United States v. Mervyn Harold Cross, 928 F.2d 1030 (11th Cir. 1991)
  …fact in issue.”63 Federal Rule of Evidence 702. See United States v. Rouco, 765 F. 2d 983, 995 (11th Cir.1985) (expert may be used if his testimony can offer something “beyond the understanding and experience of the average citizen”), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1124, 106 S.Ct. 1646, 90 L.Ed.2d 190 (1986); Burchfield, 719 F. 2d at 357 (expert testimony admissible where it is “the kind that enlightens and informs lay persons without expertise in a specialized field”). See also Notes of Advisory Committee on Pro…
• United States v. Chapman, 866 F.2d 1326 (11th Cir. 1989)
  …her hearsay exceptions.1 As explained above, the statements [*1332] were substantially corroborated and were made under circumstances which indicate their trustworthiness. See United States v. Rouco, 765 F. 2d 983, 994 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1124, 106 S.Ct. 1646, 90 L.Ed.2d 190 (1986) (finding that hearsay statements had circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness and were thus admissible under Rule 804(b)(5) largely because they were substantially corroborated by other evidence). The othe…