United States v. Richard C. Himelwright

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 purchases of weapons was inadmissible in a trial for a different crime, making threats to postal workers
• explaining that a determination of whether statements constitute true threats does not depend on the speaker’s “ability.at the time to carry out the threats” (citations omitted)
• holding that to establish violation of 875(c), \the government b[ears] only the burden of proving that [the defendant] acted knowingly and willfully when he placed the threatening phone calls and that those calls were reasonably perceived as threatening bodily injury\
• stating that for “other crimes” evidence to be admitted, it must be relevant logically, under Rules 404(b) and 402, to any issue other than the defendant’s propensity to commit the act in issue, and its probative value must outweigh its prejudicial effect
• reversing a conviction where the government used 404(b) evidence in closing argument to portray the criminal propensity of the accused
• noting prejudice can occur when a prosecutor places a “disproportionate emphasis” on Rule 404(b) evidence during closing argument

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).