United States v. Jared C. Beckman

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the prior act—a drug run—was close in time when it occurred within one month of Beckman’s arrest
• holding Rule 404(b) permitted testimony that a defendant previously smuggled marijuana across the border in the same fashion as the charged conduct
• admitting evidence of prior drug runs because it established a relationship between the defendants, refuted Beckman’s lack of knowledge defense, and explained why Beckman was entrusted with over $1,000,000 in marijuana
• “The use of a defendant’s pre-arrest, pre-Miranda silence is permissible as impeachment evidence and as evidence of substantive guilt.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).