United States v. Nathaniel Pierre York

722 F.2d 715, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 26527, 14 Fed. R. Serv. 1492
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedJanuary 12, 1984
Docket83-3277
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 722 F.2d 715 (United States v. Nathaniel Pierre York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Nathaniel Pierre York, 722 F.2d 715, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 26527, 14 Fed. R. Serv. 1492 (11th Cir. 1984).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The only issue presented in this case is whether the district court erred when it refused to make an advance ruling on appellant’s request that the government not be permitted to crossexamine him with regard to his involvement in another incident shortly after commission of the charged offense.

Neither the Eleventh Circuit nor the former Fifth Circuit has directly ruled on this issue. We choose to follow the Eighth and Ninth Circuits which have held that the decision regarding an advance ruling on the admissibility of impeachment evidence is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court. United States v. Rivers, 693 F.2d 52 (8th Cir.1982); United States v. Tercero, 640 F.2d 190 (9th Cir.1980). We find no abuse of discretion in this case.

Accordingly, the district court judgment is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
722 F.2d 715, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 26527, 14 Fed. R. Serv. 1492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-nathaniel-pierre-york-ca11-1984.