Unpublished Disposition, 918 F.2d 181 (9th Cir. 1990)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 918 F.2d 181 (9th Cir. 1990)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.David Reves PENNEY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 89-50108.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 9, 1990.* Decided Nov. 16, 1990.



Appellant, convicted of transporting illegal aliens across the border, challenges the introduction into evidence at his trial of past convictions for the same offense. Appellant concedes that the Government satisfied the four requirements of Fed.R.Evid. 404(b), and he does not challenge the limiting instruction given by the judge. Appellant limits his appeal to the question whether the trial court abused its discretion in determining that the probative value of the evidence outweighed its prejudicial effect. Fed.R.Evid. 403.

This case is controlled by our holding in United States v. Winn, 767 F.2d 527 (9th Cir. 1985), which upheld the district court's admission into evidence of a prior conviction for transporting illegal aliens in a trial for aiding and abetting the transportation of aliens. We said in that case:

Appellant's prior conviction is relevant because it shows that appellant had knowledge of the smuggling operation in which he was involved.

The balancing test which weighs probative value against prejudicial effect is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court.... In view of the relevance of appellant's prior conviction to the present charge and the court's limiting instruction to the jury, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted appellant's prior conviction.

Id. at 530 (citations omitted). The same reasoning applies here; the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the prior convictions.



The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4


This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3