Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

00-3012, 00-3228 U.S. v. Nubuor

By: dmc-admin//December 17, 2001//

00-3012, 00-3228 U.S. v. Nubuor

By: dmc-admin//December 17, 2001//

Listen to this article

“We need not address Salami’s contention that a government prosecutor’s statements may be admitted into evidence as a statement of a party opponent to conclude that, even under the most searching review, the district court’s ruling would amount to harmless error. Salami admitted to engaging in fulsome discussion with Bonsu regarding the January 14 heroin transaction and admitted that he supplied Bonsu with a sample dosage of heroin. It would strain the bounds of reason and logic to assume that a jury would change its determinations about Salami’s involvement in the drug conspiracy, in the face of a minor misunderstanding over what happened to the sample dosage of heroin he supplied to the government’s informant. Furthermore, this is not a case where the alleged erroneous exclusion of evidence precluded Salami from presenting his defense. See, e.g., United States v. Peak, 856 F.2d 825, 834-35 (7th Cir. 1988). Therefore, we find Salami’s arguments on this matter to be unavailing.”

Affirmed.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Gettleman, J., Flaum, J.

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests