United States v. Bailey

439 F.Supp 1303 (W.D. Pa. 1977)

Facts

Bailey (D) and Stewart robbed a bank. Stewart made a plea bargain with the government (P). He wrote a confession implicating D. However, at D's trial, Stewart refused to testify against D. He didn't want D to be convicted. P introduced Stewart's written confession under Federal Rule of Evidence 804 (b)(5)'s residual exception. Since Stewart did not testify personally, D could only cross-examine this statement by impeaching its credibility based on Stewart's past criminal record. D was convicted and moved for a new trial and/or acquittal.