Thursday, September 6, 2012

US v. Manske case brief

  1. US v. Manske (7th Cir 1999)
    1. three views of breadth of 608(b) – scope of nonconviction misconduct questioning:
      • broad view: allows questioning on almost any misconduct.
      • narrow view: confines questions to acts that are themselves false or misleading.
      • middle view: reaches conduct “seeking personal advantage by taking from others in violation of their rights.”
    2. cts applying FRE 608(b) have rejected broad view; generally allow questions that satisfy the narrow view by asking directly about deceptive statements or behavior.
      • it’s cases like Manske, where conduct has a wrongful/exploitative aspect but isn’t false or deceptive in itself that courts come out either way.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Exploring Career Paths: What Can You Do with a Juris Doctor Degree?

Earning a Juris Doctor (JD) degree is a significant accomplishment, opening a wide array of career paths beyond the traditional legal practi...