Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

D had been convicted of armed robbery in 1988. D robbed a bank using a firearm. He pleaded guilty in 1989 and was sentenced to a substantial prison term. He entered supervised release on September 6, 1996. On July 30, 1998, D and an accomplice, Kevin Carroll, robbed a Credit Union. P sought to introduce evidence of his prior conviction under Rule 404(b). Over objection, The District Court determined that the evidence of D's prior conviction was 'admissible for purposes of showing a plan or pattern …a melding basically of that, plus identity.' The jury was instructed that it could use the Rule 404(b) evidence 'to help it decide whether the similarity between the acts previously committed and the ones charged in this case suggest that the same person committed all of them.' D was convicted and appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.