United States Ninth Circuit

An exculpatory post-arrest statement, relating to earlier events, was not admissible as an excited utterance under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(2). Fact that one juror's response was not audible to a transcriber does not demonstrate that jury verdict lacked unanimity.

Appellate Information

• Argued 08/07/2002
• Decided 08/27/2002
• Published 08/27/2002

Judges

• ALARCÓN, Circuit Judge:, Before: B. FLETCHER, ALARCÓN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Hugh W. Fleischer, Anchorage, AL, for the defendant-appellant., Kevin R. Feldis, Assistant United States Attorney, Anchorage, AL, for the plaintiff-appellee.