United States v. Goldwire
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
55 M.J. 139 (2001)
- Written by Kyli Cotten, JD
Facts
Shawn Goldwire (defendant), an Air Force servicemember, was charged with raping a fellow servicemember. The alleged rape happened at a house party while both parties were intoxicated. At trial, Goldwire did not testify. Special Agent Donald Phillips was called by the prosecution and testified that during an investigation, Goldwire admitted to having sexual intercourse with the alleged victim. On cross-examination, the defense asked Phillips about certain out-of-court statements Goldwire made to Phillips that indicated the alleged victim was participating in the intercourse. To attack the credibility of the admitted hearsay statements, the prosecution (plaintiff) called Sergeant Green to testify to Goldwire’s character for untruthfulness under Federal Rule of Evidence 806. Goldwire was convicted. On appeal, Goldwire argued that testimony regarding his statements to Phillips were an exercise of his rights under the rule of completeness. Therefore, Goldwire argued that that he did not put his credibility in issue by eliciting the testimony from Phillips and that admitting impeachment testimony on his character for truthfulness was not proper.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Crawford, C.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.
