§Why CasetextPricing

USA v. Chen

MOTION To Preclude Admission of 404

19 Cited authorities

  1. Huddleston v. United States

    485 U.S. 681 (1988)   Cited 2,353 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under Rule 104(b), the "court simply examines all the evidence in the case and decides whether the jury could reasonably find the conditional fact . . . by a preponderance of the evidence"

  2. U.S. v. Hardy

    228 F.3d 745 (6th Cir. 2000)   Cited 274 times
    Holding that the district court abused its discretion in admitting testimony of drug transactions occurring six years before the date of the charged conspiracy that involved different parties than those named in the conspiracy

  3. U.S. v. Mack

    258 F.3d 548 (6th Cir. 2001)   Cited 211 times
    Finding that the use of a ski mask with a hooded sweatshirt and the method of "burst[ing] into the bank and "leap[ing]" over the teller counter constituted a signature

  4. U.S. v. Jenkins

    345 F.3d 928 (6th Cir. 2003)   Cited 153 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there must be sufficient evidence that the prior bad act occurred; the prior bad act must be probative of an issue other than character; and if steps one and two are met, the district court must have correctly decided that the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by its potential prejudicial effect

  5. U.S. v. Johnson

    27 F.3d 1186 (6th Cir. 1994)   Cited 192 times
    Holding that "where there is thrust upon the government ... by virtue of the elements of the crime charged, the affirmative duty to prove that the underlying prohibited act was done with a specific criminal intent, other acts evidence may be introduced under Rule 404(b)"

  6. U.S. v. Merriweather

    78 F.3d 1070 (6th Cir. 1996)   Cited 178 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that jury instructions listing seven Rule 404(b) purposes, many of which were plainly inapplicable, was error

  7. U.S. v. Haywood

    280 F.3d 715 (6th Cir. 2002)   Cited 146 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an objection to evidence as irrelevant and prejudicial was sufficient to preserve Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) issue

  8. U.S. v. Reyeros

    537 F.3d 270 (3d Cir. 2008)   Cited 81 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding no agency relationship where government of Columbia responded to a United States request for investigative or judicial assistance

  9. United States v. Daniels

    770 F.2d 1111 (D.C. Cir. 1985)   Cited 114 times
    In Daniels, the nature of the prior felony had been redacted from the felon-in-possession-of-firearms charge in the indictment, and the jury was read a stipulation that the defendant had been convicted of an unspecified felony.

  10. United States v. Ismail

    756 F.2d 1253 (6th Cir. 1985)   Cited 79 times
    Upholding the admission of prior-acts evidence involving the distribution of hashish (a marijuana product) and cocaine even though the charged offense involved heroin

  11. Rule 403 - Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons

    Fed. R. Evid. 403   Cited 22,526 times   81 Legal Analyses
    Adopting a similar standard, but requiring the probative value to be "substantially outweighed" by these risks

  12. Rule 404 - Character Evidence; Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts.

    Fed. R. Evid. 404   Cited 16,678 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that even uncharged similar acts can be probative of a defendant's intent and knowledge concerning charged offenses

  13. Section 1001 - Statements or entries generally

    18 U.S.C. § 1001   Cited 7,333 times   300 Legal Analyses
    Making false statements

  14. Section 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers

    18 U.S.C. § 1030   Cited 3,230 times   408 Legal Analyses
    Holding cellular phones are protected

  15. Section 641 - Public money, property or records

    18 U.S.C. § 641   Cited 2,927 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Requiring knowledge