United States v. Melvin Blum, Charles Monteleone

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that Rule 404(b) permits “admission against third parties of evidence of ‘crimes, wrongs or acts’ if used to show ‘motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity of absence of mistake or accident.”
• reviewing an evidentiary ruling for abuse of discretion without announcing a separate standard of review for the overarching compulsory process challenge
• rejecting the district court’s limitations on evidence because the district court failed to perform the balancing analysis required under Fed.R.Evid. 403
• “We do not share the district court’s view that [defendant] attempted to introduce this evidence primarily to impeach [the “aaltperp’s”] credibility.”
• evidence that government witness had independent motive to falsify logbook, where prosecution’s theory was that defendant had directed witness to do it
• “Indeed, given the importance of the testimony to the defense, whatever confusion that may have resulted from its admission would have to have been overwhelming to satisfy Rule 403’s balancing test.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).