Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
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.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division.
Argued April 14, 2009
Decided September, 2009
Sign into your Legal Forms and Services account to manage your estate planning documents.Sign In
Create an account allows to take advantage of these benefits: