District of Columbia, August, 2004, State Case law

Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!

Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!

State Courts - District of Columbia - August 6 - August 13, 2004

Douglas v. Kriegsfeld Corp., No. 02-CV-711, LT50733-01, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 6, 2004, Filed
View this case - free

Search Cases for Free

Ford v. United States, No. 98-CF-119, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 12, 2004, Filed
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant's petition for rehearing was denied as the trial court's reasonable efforts instruction was not coercive; it simply reminded the jurors to abide by their sworn oath and to consider only the evidence.

Search Cases for Free

Morten v. United States, Nos. 97-CF-1263, 02-CO-54, 97-CF-1393, 97-CF-1406, 97-CF-1557, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 12, 2004, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: A court's ruling admitting hearsay statements of nontestifying codefendants as declarations against penal interest violated murder defendants' Sixth Amendment rights and was not harmless, it was error of constitutional magnitude requiring reversal.

Search Cases for Free

Murray v. United States, Nos. 02-CF-52, 02-CF-194, 02-CF-391, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 12, 2004, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Although prosecutor went astray when he argued that an acquittal for kidnapping while armed would somehow make witnesses' act of testifying in fear nugatory, impropriety did not require reversal under the nonconstitutional harmless error doctrine.

Search Cases for Free

Sharp v. Ward, Case No. 01ca2184, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, CIVIL DIVISION, August 13, 2004, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: A lessor could not shift a leased car's primary coverage to a lessee's policy providing excess coverage because (1) D.C. Code ? 31-2401 et seq. (2004) required the lessor to provide primary coverage, (2) the lessee did not waive this coverage, (3) the lessee could not unilaterally change his policy, and (4) shifting coverage breached public policy.

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal