Opinion ID: 213502
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Ware’s Sixth Claim

Text: Ware contends that the testimony of a government witness, who was a drug user under arrest, was incredible as a matter of law and that the admission of her testimony violated due process. But in federal criminal cases, everyone is competent to testify except (1) a person who refuses to declare that he or she will testify truthfully, (2) the presiding judge, and (3) any member of the jury hearing the case. See generally Fed. R. Evid. 601–615. As we previously stated, witness credibility determinations are the exclusive province of the jury and may not be disturbed unless the witness’s testimony was incredible as a matter of law. 15 Calderon, 127 F.3d at 1325. Here, the witness was competent to testify, and her testimony was not “incredible as a matter of law.” Accordingly, the district court did not plainly err in admitting her testimony.