Case law

Kleinbart v. United States

426 A.2d 343 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 30, 1981

Several weeks before trial, Faretta “clearly and unequivocally declared” to the trial court his desire to represent himself. Id. at 836, 95 S.Ct. at 2541 . … He argues that bifurcation was clearly warranted since his claim of self-defense was inconsistent with his defense of insanity.

McCray v. United States

133 A.3d 205 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 10, 2016

The prosecutor disagreed, noting that the jury had been deliberating only for “maybe four and a half hours a day,” and that “[t]here’s clearly a problem.” … The court’s findings clearly refute Mr. McCray’s argument that the videotaped interview began at.2:30.p.m., continued until 8:23 p.m., and “[a]t that point, .[Mr.

District of Columbia v. Burlington Apartment House Co.

375 A.2d 1052 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 13, 1977

However, the same organic act contains another and qualifying provision that is not to be found in the acts creating the Tax Court: "The findings of fact by the board shall have the same effect as a finding of fact by an … not later than July 1, annually, and when approved by the Commissioner shall constitute the basis of taxation for the next succeeding year and until another valuation is made according to law . . .. [2] The timetable for establishment

Young & Height v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 2023

Liverpool testified during trial pursuant to an immunity letter provided by the government shielding her from prosecution for perjury or obstruction of justice based on her testimony before the grand jury. 13 However, she … “It may therefore explain, avoid, or qualify the new substantive facts or impeachment matters elicited by the cross examiner.” Rose v.

Jeremiah Gray v. United States

79 A.3d 326 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 7, 2013

Mere physical presence by the defendant at the place and time the crime is committed is not by itself sufficient to establish his guilt. … The question was posed despite what our paragraph above suggests were instructions that should clearly have precluded a “yes” answer (even if the jury thought appellant was an accessory after the fact to robbery).

In Re MMD

662 A.2d 837 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 1995

Section 16-312, which announces the "legal effects" of adoption, does not apply unless and until a petitioner qualifies for adoption under § 16-302, which prescribes "who may adopt." … The court added that, by permitting adoption by an unmarried person, "the Legislature clearly sanctioned adoption into `non-standard' families."

Kinney v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 29, 2022

App. 2012) (finding that it is likely to elicit an incriminating response when “police, having first established a rapport with a suspect who has been arrested . . . tell the suspect that they want to hear his . . . side … Cir. 2016) (concluding that under the totality of the circumstances, the “officers deliberately employed the two-step interrogation technique condemned in Seibert, and that the magistrate judge and the district court clearly

Abney & Proctor v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 28, 2022

After excusing the other jurors, the trial court explained to Juror 7 that the court could not release him from jury duty because his travel plans did not “qualify in the law as extraordinary circumstances.” … Proctor argues that the affidavit does not clearly state that Mr. Proctor used his cell phone to contact Mr. Green-Ashe on the night of the robbery. Rather, Mr.

McCoy v. United States

760 A.2d 164 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 28, 2000

However, if it is established that the statements were made in the course of the conspiracy, meeting the “in furtherance of’ requirement is not difficult. Id. (citations omitted). … However, Halicki requires “[s]ome conduct by an alleged accomplice of an affirmative character in furtherance of the act of carrying the pistols by the ... principals [to] be established.”

Derrington v. United States

681 A.2d 1125 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 1996

Wood stated quite clearly that “it hurts my relationship with Mr. Taylor[ 14 ] if he finds out that I represented someone who’s cooperating in the R Street [case].” … Der-rington has established the requisite plausibility. 2. Adverse Effect.

Gooding v. United States

513 A.2d 1320 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 20, 1986

With the qualified exception of the benefit of competent counsel, all of the factors we have identified weigh more or less in favor of the conclusion that withdrawal of the guilty plea should have been allowed. … The record establishes, to the contrary, that appellant knew he had little chance with a coercion defense.

Stubblefield v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 26, 2025

Stubblefield Did Not Clearly Waive His Right to Appeal the Earlier Convictions Stubblefield and the government disagree about whether he waived his right to appeal his convictions stemming from the October robbery … It is undisputed, and undoubtable, that a bomb qualifies as a dangerous or deadly weapon under the statute.

Jonathan Blades v. United States

200 A.3d 230 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 23, 2019

While Copeland is not easily reconciled with Jury Questionnaires or, for that matter, with the whole body of Supreme Court case law on the right to public trial, what qualifies as a holding in a case and whether one of our … Miller , 537 F.3d 102 , 110 (2d Cir. 2008) (holding that the proposed use of a screen during an undercover officer's testimony did not violate clearly established federal law where the state courts properly applied the Waller

FDS Restaurant v. All Plumbing Inc.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 26, 2020

The court held that, because the evidence only established that All Plumbing authorized B2B to send faxes to Virginia, FDS had not met its burden to show that the fax it received at its D.C. number was sent “on behalf … These principles clearly bear on the situation we examine here, i.e., vicarious liability vel non for a business as a result of the actions of a fax broadcaster it has hired.

In Re Lyles

680 A.2d 408 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 18, 1996

Nelson, she clearly did not act with such knowledge or competence. … The Hearing Committee bent over backwards in encouraging Respondent to see if she qualified for counsel and urging her to meet the deadlines for seeking permission to present evidence of her disability under Board Rule 7.6

Freeman v. District of Columbia

60 A.3d 1131 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 15, 2012

We therefore assume without deciding that the letter contains sufficient factual allegations of undue coercion, vague and conclusory though the allegations are, to qualify as a potentially protected disclosure. 18 Apart from … The report was admitted solely to establish the non-retaliatory basis for Cockett’s decision to terminate Freeman. 40 2.

Howard v. United States

656 A.2d 1106 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 30, 1995

Where sufficient time elapses between the victim's act of violence and the criminal offense, legal provocation will not be established. See Jamison v. United States, 373 A.2d 594, 596 (D.C.1977 [3] . … If at least one other type of malice qualifies, such as "a specific intent to inflict serious bodily harm" or "a wanton and willful disregard of an unreasonable human risk," Comber v.

Germany v. United States

984 A.2d 1217 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 3, 2009

As established by Terry v. … immunity because a reasonable officer “would have stopped the search upon discovering that respondents were of a different race than the suspects and because a reasonable deputy would not have ordered respondents from their

Lewis v. United States

483 A.2d 1125 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 2, 1984

There, however, the testimony that the state sought to use for impeachment purposes had been obtained in response to a grant of legislative immunity. … We next examine other evidence adduced by the government that tended to establish the same facts admitted by appellant in his statements.

A.C. v. N.W.

160 A.3d 509 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 1, 2017

New evidence of abuse would also clearly be relevant to the determination. … Lopez was qualified to testify as an expert in clinical mental health, and although he made occasional objections (many of which were sustained), he did not object (or asserted only a general relevance or form objection)