United States v. Inadi
United States Supreme Court
475 U.S. 387 (1986)
- Written by Richard Lavigne, JD
Facts
Inadi (defendant) was charged with federal drug offenses based, in part, upon legal wiretaps of co-conspirators. Inadi moved the trial court to exclude the recorded statements of co-conspirators. The trial court found that the statements were made by co-conspirators in furtherance of a conspiracy and thereby satisfied the hearsay exemption set forth in the Federal Rules of Evidence. Inadi also asserted that the recorded statements were inadmissible on Confrontation Clause grounds in the absence of a showing that the witnesses were unavailable. The court recommended that the prosecution make an effort to have the witness appear and allowed the admission of the witness’ recorded statements conditioned upon the prosecution’s agreement to produce the witness. The witness claimed to have car troubles and failed to appear. Inadi made no efforts himself to secure the witness’ appearance. The trial court concluded that the witness’ recorded statements were admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. Inadi was convicted and took his appeal to the United States Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Powell, J.)
Dissent (Marshall, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.
