United States v. Freeman
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
498 F.3d 893 (2007)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Kevin Freeman (defendant) was charged with conspiracy to possess cocaine with the intent to distribute. At trial, the prosecution called Bob Shin, a police detective, as an expert witness. The district court permitted Shin to testify as an expert witness about the meaning of certain coded drug-related language used in Freeman’s phone conversations. Shin also testified as a lay witness about the meaning of certain statements made on the calls that did not use drug jargon, but that the jurors could reasonably understand on their own. For example, Shin testified that when someone on a call used the phrase “get all the particulars,” the person meant to get all the details. The district court did not instruct the jury on Shin’s dual roles as both an expert witness and a lay witness. Freeman did not request this jury instruction either. Freeman was convicted, and he appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gibson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 807,000 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.
