Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Colby, 2:15-cr-00182-GZS. (2016)

Court: District Court, D. Maine Number: infdco20160601a72 Visitors: 5
Filed: May 31, 2016
Latest Update: May 31, 2016
Summary: ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE GEORGE Z. SINGAL , District Judge . Before the Court are Defendant's Motions in Limine to exclude the introduction of (1) testimony by Forrest Smith of drug use by Defendant, involvement by Defendant in illegal drugs sales or purchases, and the residential living arrangements of Defendant (ECF No. 75) (the "Third Motion in Limine"), (2) testimony by Joseph Rogers of alleged threats made by Defendant against Joseph Rogers (ECF No. 73) (the "Fourth Motion in Limine"
More

ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE

Before the Court are Defendant's Motions in Limine to exclude the introduction of (1) testimony by Forrest Smith of drug use by Defendant, involvement by Defendant in illegal drugs sales or purchases, and the residential living arrangements of Defendant (ECF No. 75) (the "Third Motion in Limine"), (2) testimony by Joseph Rogers of alleged threats made by Defendant against Joseph Rogers (ECF No. 73) (the "Fourth Motion in Limine"), and (3) two text messages statements allegedly sent by Defendant to Jyllian York on March 18, 2015 (ECF No. 74) (the "Fifth Motion in Limine").

The Third Motion in Limine and the Fourth Motion in Limine are GRANTED WITHOUT OBJECTION, and the Government shall instruct Forrest Smith and Joseph Rogers to make no reference to the matters described in these Motions.

As to the Fifth Motion in Limine, the Court concludes that the first text message statement referenced in the Motion ("Wtf guys y did u call the cops") is probative of Defendant's consciousness of guilt and is relevant evidence under Rule 401. Therefore, the Fifth Motion in Limine is DENIED as to the first text message statement. The Court RESERVES RULING on the second text message statement referenced in the Motion ("This I should fucking kill u all u dumb snitch ass faggitd"). The Government shall make no reference to the second text message statement in its opening statement, and shall not elicit testimony on this statement or make any reference to it in an exhibit without first making an offer of proof to the Court outside of the presence of the jury.

SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

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