United States v. Randy Never Misses A Shot

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that district court did not violate defendant’s right to present evidence when it excluded evidence of the victim’s prior molestation which the defendant argued supported his theory that another actor caused the victim’s sexual trauma
• stating that \evidence that the defendant committed similar sexual assaults or child molestations\ can be used to prove guilt
• affirming that the applicable legal standard under Rule 413 and Rule 403 “doesn’t require that the testimony be identical or nearly identical to what’s alleged in the indictment”
• involving evidence of specific prior molestations suffered by one of the victims, though we held that admission was not constitutionally required
• upholding exclusion of child victim’s abuse history to prove alternate source of “sexual knowledge, experience, and trauma” without discussing Bear Stops
• shielding victims from embarrassment and shame due to other abuse is within the boundaries of Rule 412

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).