RIDDICK ET AL.

v.

SCHOOL BOARD OF CITY OF NORFOLK ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Myers, 972 F.2d 1566 (11th Cir. 1992)
  …that are neither explanatory of nor relevant to those portions of the statement introduced by the prosecution. United States v. Smith, 794 F. 2d 1333, 1335 (8th Cir.) (citing United States v. Marin, 669 F. 2d 73, 84-85 (2d Cir.1982)), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 938, 107 S.Ct. 419, 93 L.Ed.2d 370 (1986). As we have already explained, the prosecution introduced portions of Myers’ statement for the purposes of impeaching Myers’ testimony regarding the number of times he used the stun gun on Yanez. The informati…
• United States v. Arraion Range, Jr., 94 F.3d 614 (11th Cir. 1996)
  …of the statement or excludes information substantially exculpatory of the nontestifying defendant.” United States v. Lopez, 898 F. 2d 1505, 1511 n. 11 (11th Cir.1990) (citing United States v. Smith, 794 F. 2d 1333, 1335 (8th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 938, 107 S.Ct. 419, 93 L.Ed.2d 370 (1986)). Here, the redacted version did not distort Range’s statement. Given the trial court’s obligation to protect both the interests of Range’s co-defendants and the interest in judicial economy, United States v. C…
• Dowell v. The Bd. OF Educ. OF THE Okla. City Pub. Schs., 890 F.2d 1483 (10th Cir. 1989)
  …in 1977 and terminating jurisdiction of the case. The case was revived when the school district adopted a new student assignment plan, although a 1972 decree had not been lifted. In Dowell v. Board of Educ., 795 F. 2d 1516 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 938, 107 S.Ct. 420, 93 L.Ed.2d 370 (1986), this court determined that reopening the case was appropriate so that the plaintiffs would have an opportunity to be heard on the constitutionality of the plan. Id. at 1519. Although Dowell did not express an…

  ← 1 / 3 →