U.S. v. Joe, No. 92-2213
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Before LOGAN, TACHA and KELLY; TACHA |
| Citation | 8 F.3d 1488 |
| Parties | , 39 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 920 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Melvin JOE, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Docket Number | No. 92-2213 |
| Decision Date | 03 November 1993 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
136 practice notes
-
United States v. Gutierrez, No. CR 15-3955 JB
...the hypothetical statement could become inadmissible, because the assertion's truth might be Gutierrez' belief. See United States v. Joe, 8 F.3d 1488, 1492-93 (10th Cir. 1993). In those instances, the Court would exclude the evidence as hearsay. Without specific statements, however, the Cou......
-
U.S. v. Pettigrew, No. 05-2187.
...rarely disturbed." Id. A photograph of a victim while living is admissible to prove the identity of the victim. See United States v. Joe, 8 F.3d 1488, 1499 (10th Cir.1993). The District Court acknowledged that a photo of the victim could stir up sympathy and emotions in the jurors, but conc......
-
State v. Massengill, No. 22,358.
...hand, the Tenth Circuit has rejected any requirement that a court inquire into a declarant patient's motivation. See United States v. Joe, 8 F.3d 1488, 1494 n. 5 (10th Cir.1993) (noting that such statements "`are made in contexts that provide substantial guarantees of their trustworthiness'......
-
Burris v. Parke, No. 3:95-CV-0917 AS.
...counsel could have believed that the photo constituted some form of admissible victim impact evidence.14 Further, in United States v. Joe, 8 F.3d 1488 (10th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1184, 114 S.Ct. 1236, 127 L.Ed.2d 579 (1994), the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circu......
Request a trial to view additional results
134 cases
-
United States v. Gutierrez, No. CR 15-3955 JB
...the hypothetical statement could become inadmissible, because the assertion's truth might be Gutierrez' belief. See United States v. Joe, 8 F.3d 1488, 1492-93 (10th Cir. 1993). In those instances, the Court would exclude the evidence as hearsay. Without specific statements, however, the Cou......
-
U.S. v. Pettigrew, No. 05-2187.
...rarely disturbed." Id. A photograph of a victim while living is admissible to prove the identity of the victim. See United States v. Joe, 8 F.3d 1488, 1499 (10th Cir.1993). The District Court acknowledged that a photo of the victim could stir up sympathy and emotions in the jurors, but conc......
-
State v. Massengill, No. 22,358.
...hand, the Tenth Circuit has rejected any requirement that a court inquire into a declarant patient's motivation. See United States v. Joe, 8 F.3d 1488, 1494 n. 5 (10th Cir.1993) (noting that such statements "`are made in contexts that provide substantial guarantees of their trustworthiness'......
-
Burris v. Parke, 3:95-CV-0917 AS.
...counsel could have believed that the photo constituted some form of admissible victim impact evidence.14 Further, in United States v. Joe, 8 F.3d 1488 (10th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1184, 114 S.Ct. 1236, 127 L.Ed.2d 579 (1994), the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circu......
Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
-
Table of Cases
...v. James, 609 F.2d 36 (2d Cir. 1979), 150, 160 United States v. Janati, 374 F.3d 263 (4th Cir. 2004), 234, 235, 236 United States v. Joe, 8 F.3d 1488 (10th Cir. 1993), 26 United States v. John Doe, Inc. I, 481 U.S. 102 (1987), 124, 130 United States v. Johnson, 200 F.3d 529 (7th Cir. 2000),......
-
Hearsay Issues Most Relevant in Antitrust Cases
...inadmissible because it was based on comments made by a third party rather than the declarant’s own perception); United States v. Joe, 8 F.3d 1488, 1493 n.4 (10th Cir. 1993) (“An out-of-court statement relating a third-party’s state of mind falls outside the scope of the hearsay exception b......