United States v. Reed, No. 10-2457 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of three counts of receipt and distribution and one count of knowing possession of child pornography. At issue was whether the district court abused its discretion in granting the government's pretrial motion in limine to exclude the fact that its superseding indictment omitted charges for which defendant had provided evidence of an alibi defense, and in sustaining an objection to a portion of defendant's trial testimony based upon that pretrial ruling. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting the motion where the government limited its motion in limine to evidence of its charging decisions. The court also held that defendant's contention that the district court misapplied its own pretrial ruling and barred him from presenting relevant alibi evidence was not properly preserved at trial, either by offer of proof, request for clarification, or an attempt to introduce the purported alibi evidence in another way. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court was affirmed.
Court Description: Criminal case - criminal law. District court did not err in excluding evidence of the government's prior charging decisions as many factors unrelated to guilt may influence those decisions and their admission risks misleading the jury and confusing the issue; court did not err in limiting defendant's testimony regarding alibis for dates not included in the superseding indictment.
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.