United States of America, Plaintiff--appellee, v. Ahmad Mickens, Defendant--appellant, 53 F.3d 329 (4th Cir. 1995)
Annotate this CaseARGUED: Nathan A. Hicks, Jr., Charleston, WV, for Appellant. Philip Judson Combs, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, WV, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Rebecca A. Betts, United States Attorney, Michael L. Keller, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, WV, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
Ahmad Mickens appeals a judgment entered on the verdict of a jury convicting him of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1). The sole issue raised on appeal is the admissibility into evidence of a tape recording. Finding no error, we affirm.
The district court admitted the recording of a conversation between Mickens and an informant who was killed before the trial. The recording contained Mickens's relevant admissions. Mickens contends that the recording was inadmissible because the informant's statements were hearsay.
Mickens's recorded, incriminating statements were admissible. Fed.R.Evid. 801(d) (2). The deceased informant's statements were not hearsay because they were not introduced to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Fed.R.Evid. 801(c). They placed Mickens's statements in the proper context. Consequently, the recording was admissible. United States v. McDowell, 918 F.2d 1004, 1007-08 (1st Cir. 1990); United States v. Leake, 642 F.2d 715, 720 n. 6 (4th Cir. 1981); United States v. Lemonakis, 485 F.2d 941, 948-49 (D.C. Cir. 1973).
AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
