United States v. Cesar Mascorro
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM *
1. Mascorro’s own admission of his pri- or bad act provides sufficient proof under Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681, 690, 108 S.Ct. 1496, 99 L.Ed.2d 771 (1988), for admission of the prior bad act into evidence. Admitting the evidence didn’t violate Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because the prior bad act indicated both Mascorro’s knowledge that his passengers were in the United States unlawfully and his purpose to help them remain. See United States v. Longoria, 624 F.2d 66, 69 (9th Cir.1980). The district court didn’t abuse its discretion in finding that the prejudicial…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Huddleston v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- United States v. Hector Ramirez-JiminezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- United States v. Steve Navarro-Vargas, United States of America v. Jose Antonio Leon-JassoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- United States v. Enrique Cortez-RiveraCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- United States v. Esteban Duran Longoria, United States of America v. Esteban Duran LongoriaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.