Case law

Jordan v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 27, 2020

It is well established that “arguments not raised in the trial court are ordinarily waived on appeal,” Blackson v. … Sentencing should not be “a game in which a wrong move by the judge means immunity for the prisoner.” Bozza, 330 U.S. at 166–67. But Rule 35(a) proceedings likewise should not be a game.

Bishop v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 29, 2024

Bishop failed to “establish[ ] his lack of dangerousness” due to the violent nature of his offense and his disciplinary record while incarcerated. Although Mr. … When the Council intended to qualify a factor under the IRAA, it did so. See, e.g., D.C. Code § 24-403.03(c)(3) (“Whether the defendant has substantially complied with the rules of the institution . . . .”)

Salem Media v. Awan

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 7, 2023

As to the fault standard upon which to judge the publication of the defamatory statements, the court concluded that while the controversy “is clearly of public concern,” the Awans were not public figures; they were “private … Involuntary Public Figures Salem argues that even if the Awans are not voluntary public figures, they qualify as “involuntary” public figures.

Johns v. United States

434 A.2d 463 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 17, 1981

Two states, in any event, clearly have rejected the Missouri approach. In Roberson v. … As to the third assignment of error, the determination whether a witness is qualified to testify about reputation is left to the sound discretion of the trial judge. See Gage v.

Shawn Smith v. United States

180 A.3d 45 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 8, 2018

As Smith passed a wooden fence enclosing a yard near the alley, he pulled what "clearly" appeared to be a black semiautomatic handgun from his waistband and tossed it over the wooden fence into the yard. … Because bias is "not a collateral issue," a defendant may "introduce extrinsic evidence," 16 including witnesses and documents, to establish it. *52 B.

United States v. Porter

618 A.2d 629 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 1992

Clearly, additional such studies are desirable. (NRC REPORT, 82.) … Laboratories involved in forensic DNA typing should move quickly to establish quality-assurance programs.

Rowland v. United States

840 A.2d 664 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 15, 2004

“An exercise of judicial discretion will not be reversed unless it appears that it was exercised on grounds, or for reasons, clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable.” Clayborne v. … The framework we use for evaluating claims of improper questions or comments by the prosecutor at trial is well-established.

C.C. v. G.D.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 15, 2024

“As a general proposition, civil contempt of a court order, including a consent decree, may be established only if the order allegedly violated is ‘specific and definite,’ or ‘clear and unambiguous.’” Fed. Mktg. … 57 “‘A trial court has a considerable measure of discretion in determining the appropriate amount of alimony and child support,’ and ‘that determination will not be disturbed on appeal unless the court clearly

Veney v. United States

936 A.2d 811 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 16, 2007

The record does not clearly establish whether appellant complied with these conditions. 10 . Appellant in this case was charged with “a crime of violence” — child sexual abuse. See D.C.Code § 23-1331(4) (2001). 11 . … The court also ruled that the government would have to establish by clear and convincing evidence that such prior abuse had occurred.

Gordon v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 17, 2022

Coleman was careful to qualify his opinion, and only opined on the fact that the six cartridges were most likely fired from a similar type of unspecified gun. … Gordon has not disputed in this court that the evidence was sufficient to establish that he assaulted Ms. Morris and that he intended to kill John Doe.

Fort Myer Constr. Co. v. Briscoe

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 3, 2023

Briscoe was qualified to receive such benefits because Fort Myer had not presented evidence showing that Mr. Briscoe had engaged in misconduct. … Based on the record in this case, I find that Employer established that [Mr. Briscoe] engaged in disqualifying misconduct.”

In Re White

11 A.3d 1226 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 20, 2011

The Board concluded that respondent’s actions did not clearly satisfy these three criteria. … As the Hearing Committee recounted, the record clearly demonstrates Respondent’s failure to acknowledge the wrongfulness of her conduct.

Long v. United States

687 A.2d 1331 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 28, 1996

other, such that the evidence reflects two transactions (or a series of transactions) so "intimately entangled” that, whether looked at from the beginning (drug sale) or the end (weapon offense) each criminal event is not clearly … and then doubles back to accost the victim with a gun — even when such an approach has occurred twice in a short period of time in a fairly restricted geographical area — has used a sufficiently unusual modus operandi to qualify

Grayson v. AT & T CORP.

15 A.3d 219 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 20, 2011

Breakman’s “mere interest” in the alleged unlawfulness of AOL’s business practices, “no matter how longstanding the interest and no matter how qualified [he] is in evaluating the problem, is not sufficient by itself to render … Such aid is available in this case and we decline to ignore the clearly relevant history of Tthe statutory provision]. Id. at 77, 94 S.Ct. 2167 . See also District of Columbia v.

Pitt v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 5, 2019

As the record clearly reflects and as detailed below, however, that was not the court’s ruling. Instead, the trial court ultimately determined that the government was entitled to question Mr. … Thus, neither of the parties in their briefs even take note of the court’s qualifying statement about the introduction of “extrinsic evidence,” much less identify this statement as having any bearing on our analysis of the

Roberts v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 26, 2019

We conclude that, as to all but one of the unlawful- disclosure counts, the United States has failed to establish that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Mr. … Roberts were “clearly public places” and that there was “not a question” as to whether the images were “visible to the public view.”

Akassy v. William Penn Apartments Ltd. Partnership

891 A.2d 291 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 2, 2006

Thus, if irreparable harm is clearly shown, the movant may prevail by demonstrating that he or she has a “substantial case on the merits.” See Antioch, supra, 418 A.2d at 110-11. … The Legal Aid Society provides free legal services to qualifying low income residents, many of whom are involved in landlord-tenant disputes. 13 .

Brisbon v. United States

957 A.2d 931 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 9, 2008

Michael Cobb’s Testimony Michael Cobb, testifying with use of immunity with respect to charges involving the stolen Ford truck, claimed that he sold the Ford F-150 truck to Brisbon. … We review the trial court’s findings of the historical facts that occurred during interrogation under a clearly erroneous standard. See Morris v. United States, 728 A.2d 1210, 1215 (D.C.1999); Peay v.

Dorman v. United States

491 A.2d 455 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 25, 1985

A party establishing conviction by means of cross-examination shall not be bound by the witness' answers as to matters relating to the conviction. … The court went on to restate the statutory rule (D.C.Code § 14-305(b) (1981)) that evidence of a prior conviction that qualifies under the statute shall be admitted for the purpose of attacking a defendant's credibility.

Facebook, Inc. v. James Pepe

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 15, 2020

The SCA does not define or qualify the meaning of an “addressee or intended recipient” of an electronic communication. … Pepe did not establish a substantial risk that Facebook’s disclosure of the existence of his subpoena to the government would even result in revealing any additional details of his self-defense strategy. Mr.