person and and that would kill over five hundred dollars greg that was the big elephant in the room that he really couldn't ignore the evidence should have been ruled inadmissible under federal rule there were two things miguel de i did not testify at all about any reason why but ruben robledo testified that vincent jackson told them it was because he was opening up his malice right and and a number of subsequent drug counts the district court ruled that the relevant for two reasons one was how the drug conspiracy the operation operated and two was the balls to the testimony of the witnesses were involving threats to witnesses one was involving a district court judge ruled that a homicide should not come out in a conspiracy prosecution i was the emphasized how how prejudicial this type of evidence is so the extent that it was relevant it was very minimally relevant the government had twenty two other witnesses and how the drug conspiracy operated it wasn't necessary for any particular points to prove at the trial there wasn't no there was no specific acts they had to do with the them i only answer is the case wasn't strong and they were worried about whether or not they can get a conviction so they bring in evidence of two stabbings they had it wasn't really specifically relevant to any particular issue of the case but just all the other evidence that they presented where the drugs were just word how it was transported mr jackson one with another individual to go with specific drug deals were he in particular instances sold drugs to an individual person and all that is how the conspiracy was our prayer that's what the government did here he presented a number of witnesses it was no problem i like to move on briefly of course doesn't have any more questions on this point to the future of whether there was a single conspiracy or multiple conspiracy in general the test is whether there is an overall agreement between all the defendants to perform various function wholesalers sometimes yet other supposedly other people distribute drugs there was no those that overall conspiracy most of the people didn't know each other they don't have to know each other and conspiracies that  you're driving a car with drugs you don't necessarily have to know who's picking it up or who delivered it but you have to know that in general that there are other people who are connected you have a single agreement involving this distribution and rights and that wasn't in the bay area and it's a conspiracy with people and secondly what about those true going to sacramento to pick up drugs for delivery to the bay area is true that two of the twenty two witnesses had some connection to both sacramento and the bay area in particular he was involved in distributing buying drugs from mr jackson in the early ninety's he went to prison and went away when he came back he moved to concord and then in concord mr jackson hooked up with him again when the evidence showed and and started distributing him again and i don't think that shows that the sacramento group is connected to the bay area not all of them know right for the proposition that this was the appropriate manner and means probative based on one it made it more likely that the actual francina storage happened in this case too that there was an organization this was proof of the conspiracy which was charged over a long period of time the conspiracy required the showing of an agreement here as counsel is challenging the very evidence of an organization as opposed to a drug dealer dealing with all very separate customers in separate ways here the government needed to show an organization and so the stabbings evidence when the stabbings were directly related to problems with storage and problems with collection of deaths went directly to the ways and means that the conspiracy operated in fact that the very violence that jackson used for the evidence showed how important it was for him to maintain the discipline within his organization which was scene of drugs consistently to sub distributors who presumably would not have funds to buy that much quantity on a regular basis all allowed this high volume drug trafficking operation to work and so the ways and means it was ways and means evidence here this drug also found as a separate bases that the events themselves were so memorable that given the other types of evidence in the case where witnesses would testify to receiving large amounts of drugs on a regular basis from jackson over time that this made the overall testimony from the witnesses more more believable it went to the  vague beverly key also testified about the same relative to the same stabbing that jackson told her that he had problems with ramirez concerning drugs so this is not a case where there is one witness particularly the victim of the violent act who is making an allegation as to a statement that was made or something that happened here as to each stabbing there were three witnesses put on the the defendant attacks the proffer that the government made somehow i think trying to call into question the district courts and balancing under rule four zero three but in fact the the property when you look at it had two essential elements one was that there would be evidence of what witnesses saw after the stabbing there was no claim that a witness saw jackson physically stabbed one of the victims and it would be evidence as to statements that jackson made after the fact regarding the stabbing that's exactly the type of evidence that came out at trial  testimony was somewhat vague the fact that the government chose not to recall alfred martinez who had already finished his testimony by the time that this issue was decided by the district court doesn't go to the fact  that the district court made a careful balance scene and after at the end of i think was the second day of trial after keyes testimony at the end of the day the district court said that it looked like the government had tied up and it was really for the in several areas where is the overall agreement that makes this one conspiracy there's one consistent all of those there's one conspiracy because this this organization was unique i look at the court's case in barrow with the drug importation scheme that although there were different places where drugs were imported then there were changes in the facts here and there over time there was one central idea which was bringing in large amounts of drugs and the method that those were brought in  have these people working together in a consistent method allowed the volume to be that much higher in drug trafficking organizations it's how much drugs that you can consistently supply to customers over a period of time here jackson had built this core group of people and then brought in additional coconspirators beyond the core group followed the same mode of operation over a long period of time with those people and was very successful in dealing high volumes of methamphetamine year in and year out during that time period so we have the identity of the participants being you know the same the core group the same over a period of time the method operation was the same as far as storage and francine jackson's control over the over the drugs even after they left his hands and they went down the distribution chain there was evidence that when michael toilet and those drugs have been supplied by jackson so he showed through that testimony the government showed that he had controls over the organization not just in dealing with you know a distance and with each customer separately there was a lot more of the hallmarks of an organization then there would be in a drug trafficking case where you had a single drug trafficker who was just simply selling to different clients of money or a certain amount of methamphetamine as as his or her profit that profit that benefit was dependent on the success of the overall organization jackson to be able to bring in a large amount of supply on a consistent basis and then to distribute that large amount of supply over a consistent basis and jackson was able to do that better than many other drug traffickers through enforcing discipline being very careful about  his handling of drugs and being very careful about keeping track of people who owed money and how much and when he was going to collect although there was an objection below with respect to sentencing on drug amounts it is so clear from the record that the district court at the statements of sentencing in the adoption of the huge amount of drugs  recommended by the pre sentence report in the district courts noting that that was probably conservative and that those statements and that adoption make clear as well as the district court saying that if there was a problem with i don't know what conspiracy by itself right and and still and in this case you could hear the evidence didn't do anything the pulse to the witness's testimony it didn't do anything to add to show the conspiracy if at all even if you determine it's relevant it had very minimal relevance to this case but the prejudice was overwhelming and the cases generally show that this is the type of evidence that will likely infringe on someone's fair trial area which between ninety eight two thousand and two while the sacramento area covered the whole ten year period there were different people involved in the bay area as in sacramento there were only two people that had any kind of a link between jackson supposedly stored in the bay area instead there were times when he supposedly made trips to the bay area him self or with others involving people that distribute  the court and we will be in recess for fifteen minutes