noting that the district court acted within its discretion by listening to the Government's proffer and then admitting the statements conditionally
Summary of this case from United States v. BellNo. 87-5362.
February 29, 1988.
Appeal from the RD.Ky., 657 F.Supp. 119.
AFFIRMED
noting that the district court acted within its discretion by listening to the Government's proffer and then admitting the statements conditionally
Summary of this case from United States v. Bellnoting that the district court acted within its discretion by listening to the Government's proffer and then admitting the statements conditionally
Summary of this case from United States v. MillsFull title:Simms v. Farris
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Date published: Feb 29, 1988
The Twenty-first Amendment gave the states the power to regulate alcohol as a commercial article. See Simms…
U.S. v. VanceOn February 23, 1988, we considered defendant's response and the record then before us and held that…