Bourjaily v. US case brief

1. Bourjaily v. US (US 1987)
1. drug conspiracy case; informant G arranges a sale of a large amt of cocaine through L; question is whether, in proving charge against B, L’s statement to G is admissible
• question of bootstrapping again – can ct only look to independent evidence in verifying existence of conspiracy, or may it also look to statement itself?
2. holding: ct may look to the statement itself as part of the foundation of its admissibility, as long as that statement isn’t the whole of it
• “The contents of the statement shall be considered but are not alone sufficient to establish … the existence of the conspiracy and the participation therein of the declarant and the party against whom the statement is offered …”

note: some jurisdictions might shift the “segregated” statements from the judge to the jury (i.e., jury has to make factual determination as to admissibility, and only then can they consider statements w/r/t guilt)