UNITED STATES V. DRAKE
932 F.2d 861 (10th Cir. 1991)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an appeal from a conviction of fraud.
FACTS: Drake (D) was charged with fraud on the basis that he sought financing while
concealing the existence of a third party security interest in the collateral. D testified
that he had no formal training in business management and that he majored in psychology and
the usual things that go along with that major and that he had a degree in psychology. D was
impeached on that issue through the use of prior inconsistent statements and D admitted he
did not have a degree but practiced clinical psychology at the University of Illinois and
Roosevelt University in 1953-54. Later in the trial D was reexamined on the issue of his
prior education and transfers between schools and it was learned and presented in court that
D was actually dismissed from the University of Illinois and had done bad acts in relation
to that dismissal. The actual trial transcript of the questioning is printed in Waltz 9th
page 501. The evidence was let in and D objected in that the evidence was not relevant and
prejudicial and violated FRED 608(b) as the introduction of extrinsic evidence. D appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment