Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Green, 96-20751 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 96-20751 Visitors: 76
Filed: Apr. 24, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-20751 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DEXTER BERNARD GREEN, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. CR-H-95-273-1 - - - - - - - - - - April 02, 1998 Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Dexter Bernard Green appeals from his conviction of being a convicted felon in possession of
More
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                           No. 96-20751
                         Summary Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                             Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DEXTER BERNARD GREEN,

                                             Defendant-Appellant.

                       - - - - - - - - - -
          Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Southern District of Texas
                     USDC No. CR-H-95-273-1
                       - - - - - - - - - -

                            April 02, 1998

Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Dexter Bernard Green appeals from his conviction of being a

convicted felon in possession of a firearm.      Green contends that

the district court erred by allowing Kenneth Satterwhite to

testify that Green and his confederates were planning a robbery.

He argues that Satterwhite’s testimony related to an extrinsic

offense that was inadmissible under FED. R. EVID. 404(b); that the

prejudicial effect of the testimony outweighed the probative

nature of the testimony; and that the limiting instruction did


     *
        Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
                            No. 96-20751
                                 -2-

not cure the prejudice caused by the admission of the testimony.

     Satterwhite’s testimony was intrinsic to Green’s possession

of a firearm.    United States v. Coleman, 
78 F.3d 154
, 156 (5th

Cir.), cert. denied, 
117 S. Ct. 230
(1996).     The prejudicial

effect of Satterwhite’s testimony did not substantially outweigh

the probative nature of the testimony.     FED. R. EVID. 403.

     AFFIRMED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer