United States v. Dring
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
930 F.2d 687 (1991)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
Alan J. Dring (defendant) was convicted of several crimes relating to a large marijuana shipment that came into San Francisco Harbor on a fishing boat. During his trial, the government presented several eyewitnesses as well as circumstantial evidence putting Dring at the harbor. Dring’s defense was mistaken identity. He presented the testimony of another eyewitness, who testified that Dring was not the person at the pier, and three alibi witnesses. The government then presented contradiction evidence and a rebuttal witness, pointing out inconsistencies between Dring’s testimony and that of other witnesses. The government did not introduce opinion or reputation testimony regarding Dring’s character for truthfulness, evidence of prior misconduct, or evidence of corruption. Dring attempted to respond with character evidence of his truthfulness, but the trial court did not allow it. Dring appealed, arguing that the trial court should have allowed his character evidence. Dring cited an exchange during his cross-examination of a government witness as well as other statements of government witnesses on direct examination to support his appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Choy, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 821,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 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.
