United States v. Livingston
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
661 F.2d 239 (1981)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
John Livingston and David Coyle (defendants) were charged with robbery of a post office. After the robbery, a postal inspector interviewed Yvonne Hester, an acquaintance of Livingston and Coyle, at her home. Hester told the inspector that Livingston and Coyle had talked and joked about the robbery. The inspector typed Hester’s statement and asked her to fix any inaccuracies in the typed version. Hester then signed the typed statement and swore to its accuracy. At trial, the prosecution (plaintiff) called Hester as a witness. Hester stated that she could not remember her conversation with the inspector. The prosecution then read excerpts from the typed, signed statement. The judge did not limit the jury’s use of the excerpts to impeaching Hester’s credibility but permitted the jury to consider the truth of the matter that Hester asserted. Livingston and Coyle were convicted, and they appealed, arguing that the trial judge erred by not limiting the use of the transcript to witness impeachment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wright, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.
