United States v. Long
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
905 F.2d 1572 (1990)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
Keith Long and Sonia Mayfield (defendants) were charged with possessing and dealing crack cocaine. When police were searching Mayfield’s apartment, the telephone rang. A police officer answered it, and a female voice asked to talk to “Keith.” When the officer said Keith was busy, the caller asked if Keith “still had any stuff.” The officer asked what the caller meant, and she said, “a fifty.” The officer said, “yeah,” and the caller asked if “Mike” could come pick it up. Before trial, defense counsel moved to exclude the telephone conversation as inadmissible hearsay. The judge refused, and the officer testified at trial about the conversation. After Long was convicted, he appealed on hearsay grounds, arguing that the caller’s questions implicitly asserted that Long was involved in drug dealing.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Thomas, 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.