U.S. Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
Evidence – Supervised release – hearsay
Where the district court allowed statements into evidence on the theory that they were excited utterances, but did not explicitly balance the interests of the parties under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1(b)(2)(C), the revocation of extended supervision must be reversed.
“In Jordan, however, we stated that ‘reliability cannot be the beginning and the end of the “interest of justice” analysis under Rule 32.1(b)(2)(C), and we do not mean to imply that finding the hearsay reliable would alone suffice to support its admission under the rule.’ Id. Furthermore, Jordan created the bright-line rule in this circuit that a district court must explicitly balance the defendant’s interests in confrontation against the government’s interests in not producing the rele-vant witness. Id. Therefore, the government’s position that the district court implicitly considered these factors still runs counter to the clear mandate of Jordan.”
Reversed and Remanded.
14-2866 U.S. v. Moslavac
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Randa, J., Flaum, J.