United States v. Canales, No. 16-3087 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction of distributing methamphetamine, holding that the district court properly excluded evidence related to an entrapment defense. Evidence of a second threat was properly excluded because the threat was unrelated to drug trafficking and was not relevant to defendant's claim that he was coerced into drug trafficking. Furthermore, evidence of the threat was not necessary to show the bias of a confidential informant and his friend.
Court Description: Benton, Author, with Colloton, Circuit Judge, and Gerrard, District Judge] Criminal case - Criminal law. The district court did not err in refusing to admit evidence of a threat allegedly made against defendant as the threat was unrelated to drug trafficking and occurred after the date of the drug offense; as a result, the evidence was not related to defendant's claim that he was coerced into drug dealing.
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.