United States v. Kupfer (Joseph)

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that any error in admitting evidence was harmless because it “had played only a minor role in the trial” and the prosecutor’s closing argument had contained no mention of the evidence
• explaining that evidence of a defendant’s other acts 23 is only subject to Rule 404(b) if it concerns the defendant’s character
• noting that “[w]hen we apply Rule 404(b), we distinguish between evidence that is extrinsic or intrinsic to the charged crime” 12 district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that they were admissible to prove knowledge—a permissible use under Rule 404(b

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).