United States v. Estrada
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
430 F.3d 606 (2005)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
Frank Estrada, Felix DeJesus, and others (defendants) were charged with various offenses relating to narcotics trafficking. During trial in federal district court, the United States (plaintiff) presented testimony from several cooperating witnesses. Defense counsel proposed impeaching some of the cooperators’ testimony with evidence of the cooperators’ prior convictions. The district court said that for “a conviction that goes to credibility,” defense counsel could inquire into the nature of the conviction. However, the court said that “[i]f it’s simply a felony conviction,” then defense counsel could ask about only the fact and date of the conviction without naming the offense. Using those guidelines, the court limited defense counsel to asking about the fact and date of unnamed felony convictions for cooperating witnesses who had been convicted of burglary, larceny, drug offenses, murder, robbery, escape, and manslaughter. DeJesus was convicted, and he appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sotomayor, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 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.
