Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

00-3774 Reeves v. U.S.

By: dmc-admin//July 2, 2001//

00-3774 Reeves v. U.S.

By: dmc-admin//July 2, 2001//

Listen to this article

“Reeves paints the government’s case as based on weak circumstantial

evidence and Elliot’s incredulous testimony. Given the weakness of the

case against him, he asserts that if he had testified a different

outcome may well have resulted because the jury would have been asked to

resolve a credibility contest between him and Elliot. Not so. The case

would not have become merely a ‘he said, he said’ if Reeves had

testified; not only did Dyer and Marks-Pozniak corroborate Elliot’s

testimony, but the thrust of the government’s case was documentary

evidence. In contrast, Reeves offered self-serving statements and

documentary evidence of little relevance. The memorandum and letter

offered by Reeves shed little light on the matter; they were written by

Reeves who had an overwhelming interest in covering up what he was or

was not doing during his employ at CCI.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern

District of Illinois, Zagel, J., Bauer, J.

Polls

Should Wisconsin Supreme Court rules be amended so attorneys can't appeal license revocation after 5 years?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests