U.S. v. Moslavac

Dist. Ct. erred in admitting hearsay evidence at parole revocation hearing regarding alleged assault of victim, even though Dist. Ct. found that said testimony from third-party was corroborated by voicemail from nine-year old, where Dist. Ct. failed to conduct explicit balancing test under Rule 32.1(b)(C). Fact that Dist. Ct. found that said testimony was reliable did not require different result since, under Jordan, 742 F.3d 280, Dist. Ct. must explicitly balance defendant’s interests in confrontation against govt.’s interests in not producing relevant witness. Moreover, fact that defendant could have received same sentence based on other proved parole violations did not render instant error harmless.