United States v. Sweiss
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
814 F.2d 1208 (7th Cir. 1987)
Moses Sweiss (defendant), a grocery store manager, was charged with conspiring to burn down a competing store. A coworker wearing a wire for law enforcement recorded two conversations with Sweiss, one in August and one in September. At trial, the prosecution introduced only the September transcript, and Sweiss sought to introduce the August transcript as well, but his counsel never invoked the rule of completeness or Rule 106, nor identified which part of the August conversation was relevant to explaining the September one. The trial court denied his request, Sweiss was convicted, and he appealed.
Whether, under the rule of completeness, a statement is admissible if the proffering party does not specify the portion of the statement that is relevant to the issue at trial and that qualifies or explains the statement already admitted.