U.S. v. Mosley

In hearing on petition to revoke defendant’s supervised release based on claim that defendant had sold crack cocaine to third-party, Dist. Ct. erred in admitting out-of-court statements of third-party, who provided details of said drug purchase, under circumstances where defendant had no opportunity to cross-examine said third-party. Although said statements qualified as reliable hearsay evidence that potentially could be used at revocation hearing, Dist. Ct. violated Rule 32.1(b)(2)(C) by failing to balance defendant’s constitutional interest in cross-examination with govt.’s reason for not producing third-party at hearing. However, no reversible error occurred where detective, who witnessed certain aspects of drug sale, provided enough facts to establish defendant’s violation of his supervised release.