US v. Nevyou Alemu, No. 15-4816 (4th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-4816 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. NEVYOU ALEMU, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:15-cr-00033-IMK-MJA-3) Submitted: August 25, 2016 Decided: August 29, 2016 Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stephen D. Herndon, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellant. William J. Ihlenfeld, II, United States Attorney, Zelda E. Wesley, Assistant United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Nevyou Alemu appeals his conviction after a bench trial for conspiracy to possess stolen firearms and aiding and abetting the possession of stolen firearms, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 371, 922(j), 924(a)(2) (2012). Alemu’s only assertion on appeal is that the district court erred in refusing to admit into evidence a disc containing audio recordings of his related state court proceedings. This Court reviews a district court’s evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion. 746, 751 (4th Cir. 2011). United States v. Medford, 661 F.3d Thus, we “afford[] the evidentiary ruling substantial deference, and will not overturn the ruling unless the decision was arbitrary (internal quotation marks omitted). and irrational.” Id. Our review of the record reveals no abuse of the district court’s discretion in excluding the evidence under Fed. R. Evid. 608(b). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

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.