United States v. Hudson
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
970 F.2d 948 (1992)
Richard Hudson and his brother James, along with others, were prosecuted together for drug distribution offenses. Hudson tried to offer a jail inmate's testimony that James had privately admitted, while in pretrial custody, that Hudson had nothing to do with drugs and that James planned to falsely testify against him out of a family grudge. Hudson never confronted James on the stand with this alleged statement or gave him a chance to explain or deny it, and the trial judge excluded the evidence as hearsay. The jury convicted Hudson on both counts, and he appealed the exclusion.
Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 613(b) requires a party to first confront a witness on the stand with an alleged prior inconsistent statement before offering extrinsic evidence of that statement, or instead only requires disclosure to the opponent and the witness's availability to respond.