United States v. Bowie, Juan

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that evidence of an earlier-in-time crime that was nearly identical to and factually connected to a charge in the indictment could not be considered intrinsic evidence of the crime charged
• concluding that defendant’s possession of counterfeit bills in April was not intrinsic to his possession of different counterfeit bills purchased from the same supplier in May
• holding that evidence of an earlier-in-time crime that was nearly identical to and factually connected to a charge in the indictment could not be considered intrinsic evidence of the crime charged
• acknowledging that evidence of “an act that is part of the charged offense ... is properly considered intrinsic”
• explaining that designation of evidence as “inextricably intertwined” unduly deprives the defendant of the right to a limiting instruction
• stating that “it cannot be that all evidence tending to prove the crime is part of the crime” because that would make Rule 404(b) “a nullity”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).