Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

US v. Alayeto, 10-2037

By FindLaw Staff on December 17, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

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:

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard