United States v. Hickey
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
917 F.2d 901 (1990)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Quinn Hickey (defendant) was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine. At trial, the prosecution called Jack Ventimiglia to testify against Hickey. During cross-examination, Ventimiglia admitted that he was a cocaine addict, had poor memory, and was unsure about certain details of the matter to which he was testifying. There were also several inconsistencies in Ventimiglia’s testimony. However, the district court admitted Ventimiglia’s testimony, and Hickey was convicted. Hickey appealed, arguing that Ventimiglia’s testimony should not have been admitted, because Ventimiglia was unable to satisfy the personal-knowledge requirement of Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 602 due to his addiction and lack of memory.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Milburn, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.