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
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 a..
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.