Exclusion of reverse 404(b) evidence in crack related conviction
US v. Alayeto, 10-2037, concerned a challenge to a conviction of defendant for possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine. In affirming, the court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in ruling defendant's proffered evidence of her co-defendant's post-arrest conduct inadmissible, and this exclusion did not violate defendant's constitutional right to present a complete defense as the evidence defendant sought to introduce could not have played a major role in casting doubt on her guilt.
As the court wrote: "[T]he proffered reverse 404(b) evidence must be relevant, must not constitute inadmissible hearsay, and must survive the balancing of competing considerations under Rule 403. The district court correctly relied on each of these rules in its evidentiary rulings below."
Related LInk:
- Read the Seventh Circuit's Full Decision in US v. Alayeto, 10-2037
