United States v. Amaral
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
488 F.2d 1148 (1973)
- Written by Kate Luck, JD
Facts
Manuel Amaral (defendant) was tried for the robbery of a national bank. During trial, Amaral sought to introduce expert-witness testimony regarding the reliability of eyewitness testimony. The trial court refused to allow the testimony. The jury found Amaral guilty of the robbery. Amaral appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in refusing to allow the expert-witness testimony.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Turrentine, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.