# United States v. Cresta

> Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · July 23, 1987 · 825 F.2d 538

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8952873

## Case

- **Full name:** United States v. Robert D. CRESTA, Appellant UNITED STATES of America v. John J. GILLEN, Jr., Appellant UNITED STATES of America v. Anthony GRAVALLESE, Appellant UNITED STATES of America v. Guido IMPEMBA, Appellant UNITED STATES of America v. Gabriel CARVAJAL, Appellant UNITED STATES of America v. Ernesto AGUDELO, Appellant UNITED STATES of America v. Richard T. FORD
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
- **Decided:** July 23, 1987
- **Citations:** 825 F.2d 538
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Wisdom
- **Judges:** Aldrich, Torruella, Wisdom
- **Cited by:** 165 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8952873

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding, without examining § 201(c)(2), that a “contingency fee arrangement is not per se impermissible,” and relying on the safeguards of cross-examination and jury instruction to “ferret out-any false testimony”
- recognizing that there is no federal requirement of corroboration of an informant's testimony -11- provided the testimony is not "incredible or insubstantial on its face" (internal quotations omitted)
- recognizing that there is no federal requirement of corroboration of an informant’s testimony provided the testimony is not “incredible or insubstantial on its face” (internal quotations omitted)
- concluding that "[t]he evidence against the two defendants was very strong if the jury believed [the lengthy testimony of the witness who made the improper remark]"
- holding that young adults do not constitute a “cognizable group” for the purpose of an equal protection challenge to the composition of a petit jury

## Opinion text

WISDOM, Senior Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the result and in almost all of the language of the opinion. I disagree only with certain language that might imply a retreat from this Court’s holding in United States v. Dailey, 759 F.2d 192 (1st Cir.1985).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8952873. Public record. Not legal advice.