Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the prosecution's failure to inform the jury that a witness had been promised not to be prosecuted in exchange for his testimony was a failure to fulfill the duty to present all material evidence to the jury, and constituted a violation of due process, requiring a new trial. [1]
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305 (2009), [1] is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that it was a violation of the Sixth Amendment right of confrontation for a prosecutor to submit a chemical drug test report without the testimony of the person who performed the test. [2]
In the Religious Society of Friends, the word testimony is used to refer to the ways in which Friends testify or bear witness to their beliefs in their everyday lives. In this context, the word testimony refers not to the underlying belief, but the committed action which arises out of their beliefs, which testifies to their beliefs.
The defence said that the testimony will take some time but Judge Newman said the witness could testify for about 30 minutes before the court takes a break for lunch. 17:36 , Rachel Sharp
Another incentive for attorneys to make sure that the text of a declaration precisely matches the declarant's recollection is that the witness may be subject to impeachment at trial if discrepancies between the declaration and any later testimony turn out to be significant. Another more practical drawback is the conservative nature of the law.
Allen Weisselberg, the former chief financial officer of Donald Trump's company, pleaded guilty Monday in New York to lying under oath during his testimony in the ex-president’s civil fraud case.
Prior to trial, the judge denied Heard's request for Depp to be psychiatrically evaluated. "Spiegel reviewed records and somehow made conclusions about Johnny's personality. This was an ethical ...
Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States and written by Justice Antonin Scalia that established the test used to determine whether a hearsay statement is "testimonial" for Confrontation Clause purposes. Two years prior to its publication, in Crawford v.