Legal Opinion
United States v. Sitzmann
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided April 13, 2012No. Criminal No. 2008-0242PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the government’s motion to admit certain evidence as intrinsic evidence or, in the alternative, to admit it as other crimes evidence under Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The defendant, through prior counsel, filed a written opposition to this motion. Current defense counsel adopted this opposition as his own and, at a motions hearing before the Court on March 15, 2012, elaborated on the arguments as to why such evidence should be excluded.
I. BACKGROUND
The government seeks the admission of…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Huddleston v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- United States v. Bowie, JuanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2000
- United States v. GreenCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
- United States v. Pantelis Antonakeas, AKA Alexx AntaeusCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- United States v. Bahman Mansoori, Mark Cox, Mohammad Mansoori, Kenneth Choice, and Terry YoungCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- United States v. Gregory SitzmannCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- United States v. Mosquera-MurilloDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- United States v. WilliamsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- United States v. SitzmannDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- United States v. EdwardsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.