What is the standard of review for admitting and denying co-conspirator statements?
MultiRegion, United States of America
The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Becerra, 26 F.3d 133 (9th Cir. 1994):
1 We articulated a slightly different standard of review in United States v. Arambula-Ruiz, 987 F.2d 599 (9th Cir.1993), stating, "We review for abuse of discretion the district court's decision to admit co-conspirator statements and for clear error the underlying factual determination that a conspiracy existed and that the statements were made in furtherance of that conspiracy." Id. at 607.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
For the purposes of denying a motion for judicial review of a decision by the Board of Arbitration for Justice denying an application to review the denial of the motion, in what circumstances will the motion be reviewed? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
If a court finds that a plaintiff has been denied a right to sue under a different legal standard than under the current standard of care, can the finding be reviewed? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
In deciding whether to admit hearsay statements made by conspirators against their co-conspirators, what is the test for admitting such statements? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is the standard of review for admitting or denying evidence of sexual abuse? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is the proper standard of review for denying a motion to reopen on the grounds of abuse, abuse and abuse of review? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Can a district court's decision to deny leave to amend be reviewed under the abuse of the abuse standard? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Does the presumption of reasonableness review automatically engage with correctness standards of review? (Canada (Federal), Canada)
Does the presumption that a person who makes a statement of intent to injure another person be liable for damages if that statement contains two statements of intent? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What is the standard of review applicable to review of a decision of an adjudicator appointed pursuant to the Canada Labour Code? (Canada (Federal), Canada)
Can a decision maker such as the Immigration Officer on an application for permanent residents in Canada be reviewed on a higher standard of review of patent unreasonableness? (Canada (Federal), Canada)
