United States v. Eddy
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
737 F.2d 564 (1984)
- Written by Elliot Stern, JD
Facts
Terrance Eddy (defendant) contacted a navy recruiter about joining the navy medical program. Eddy submitted documents to the navy recruiter that purported to be Eddy’s graduation diplomas from a college and a medical school. Eddy later claimed that these documents were falsified documents not meant to be taken seriously as evidence of graduation. As part of a criminal case, Eddy was asked about this incident under cross-examination. Specifically, Eddy was asked under oath by an examiner whether he had contacted the navy recruiter seeking to join the navy as a doctor and submitted a medical-school diploma as proof of his claim to be a doctor. Eddy denied that he had held himself out as a doctor or submitted a diploma to that effect. Eddy was also asked by the examiner if he had attempted to gain staff privileges at a hospital by showing a certificate from a medical-examiners board. Eddy responded that he did not remember going to the hospital or doing what the examiner described. Eddy was charged with two counts of perjury for these statements made under cross-examination. Eddy’s pre-trial motion to dismiss the indictments was overruled. At trial, witnesses confirmed that the documents submitted by Eddy were not authentic. Eddy was found guilty, and he appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Martin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
