UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,

v.

EDDIE ROOSEVELT HANDS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Baker, 432 F.3d 1189 (11th Cir. 2005)
  …d States v. Frazier, 387 F. 3d 1244, 1276 n. 12 (11th Cir.2004) (en banc) (Tjoflat, J., specially concurring). We review preserved evidentiary objections for harmless error. United States v. Hands, 184 F. 3d 1322, 1329 (11th Cir.1999), corrected by 194 F. 3d 1186 (11th Cir.1999). However, when a party raises a claim of evidentiary error for the first time on appeal, we review it for plain error only. United States v. Jernigan, 341 F. 3d 1273, 1280 (11th Cir.2003). Under the plain error standard, “before a…
• Chrysler Int'l Corp. v. Chemaly, 280 F.3d 1358 (11th Cir. 2002)
  …as its decision does not amount to a clear error of judgment we will not reverse even if we would have gone the other way had the choice been ours to make.” McMahan v. Toto, 256 F. 3d 1120, 1128 (11th Cir.2001); see also United States v. Cunningham, 194 F. 3d 1186, 1195 (11th Cir.1999) (“[O]ur job as an appellate court is to determine whether the district court abused its discretion, not whether we would have admitted or excluded evidence ourselves.”); In re Rasbury, 24 F. 3d 159, 168 (11th Cir.1994) (upholdi…
• United States v. Elio Jesus Arbolaez, 450 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir. 2006)
  …participation in the trafficking conspiracy. More specifically, he argues that the statements should have been excluded as hearsay. We generally review a district court’s admission of evidence for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Cunningham, 194 F. 3d 1186, 1195 (11th Cir.1999). The Federal Rules of Evidence define hearsay as “a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at 'the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” Fed.R.Evid. 801(c)…

Authorities Cited

• United States v. Hands, 184 F.3d 1322 (11th Cir. 1999)