United States v. Danze

594 F.2d 905 (2d. Cir. 1979)

Facts

Gore (D) had used trademark methods while committing robberies. There were three witnesses to a bank robbery who observed the methods of the robber. D was charged with the crime due to the similarities to his already admitted methods. D objected to the admission of his statements regarding his methods. He claimed that this evidence was prejudicial, not probative.