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. Winbush, No. 08-1602

By FindLaw Staff on September 01, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

District court's sentence and conviction of defendant on five drug-related crimes is affirmed where: 1) district court did not err by denying defendant's motion to retain a fingerprint expert as not only was defendant's motion untimely, but also unnecessary for his defense; 2) district court properly admitted agent's testimony regarding attributes of drug trafficking as the testimony was general in nature and not prejudicial; and 3) court did not commit clear error in calculating defendant's base offense and criminal history levels.     

Read US v. Winbush, No. 08-1602

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division.
Argued April 14, 2009
Decided September, 2009


Before Kanne, Rovner, and Wood, Circuit Judges 
Opinion by Kanne, Circuit Judge.

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