United States v. Barnard
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
490 F.2d 907 (1973)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Buddy Joe Barnard, Jerry Robert Barnard, Low, and Remley (defendants) were charged with various drug-related crimes. One of their codefendants, Dillon, took a plea deal and testified for the prosecution (plaintiff). Dillon had perjured himself before the grand jury in the case. At trial, the Barnards, Low, and Remley sought to call as witnesses a psychiatrist and a psychologist, who each would provide their opinion that Dillon was a sociopath who would lie if it suited him. The proffered witnesses formed their opinions by observing Dillon in court and reviewing his psychiatric evaluation from the Army. The district court sustained the prosecution’s objection to this proffered testimony. The Barnards, Low, and Remley were convicted, and they appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Duniway, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.