Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-02299/USCOURTS-ca10-91-02299-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Fred Sanders
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

\ 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

FIL i ... D ,A United States Co~rt (!f Appeall' Tenth Crr~utt 

NOV 171992 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appel lee, 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 91-2299 

v. 

FRED L. SANDERS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

(D.C. No. CR-91-22JC) 

(District of New Mexico) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT1 

Before MOORE, circuit Judge, LAY, Senior Circuit Judge, 2 and 

ANDERSON, Circuit Judge. 

Fred Sanders appeals his conviction for making a false 

statement to obtain a loan from a bank insured by the Federal 

Savings & Loan Insurance Corporation, in violation of 18 u.s.c. 

§ 1006, and for two counts of bank fraud, in violation of 18 u.s.c. 

§ 1344. Sanders complains that the trial court incorrectly 

admitted evidence of uncharged conduct in violation of Federal Rule 

of Evidence 404 (b). We review evidentiary questions of this nature 

under an abuse of discretion standard. See United States v. 

Harrison, 942 F.2d 751, 759 (10th Cir. 1991). 

1

This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th cir. R. 36.3. 

2

Honorable Donald P. Lay, Senior Circuit Judge for the United 

states Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by 

designation. 

-1-

Appellate Case: 91-2299 Document: 010110148705 Date Filed: 11/17/1992 Page: 1 
Sanders, president of the Artesia, New Mexico branch office of 

the Valley Federal savings Bank, was convicted of concealing his 

interest in a $60,000 loan from the bank to an acquaintance. He 

was also convicted of defrauding the bank by concealing payments 

made indirectly to his wife from an account he set up at the bank 

to assist in the sale and renovation of bank property. 

Sanders asserts that the trial court erred in admitting 

testimony from Gary Taylor, a local general contractor, discussing 

another transaction involving bank funds. During the trial, 

Sanders objected to introduction of Gove!nment's Exhibit 18, which 

concerned the transaction. He based the objection on grounds of 

relevancy and prejudice, but in his brief to this court, he cites 

Rule 404 (b). In order to preserve an objection for appeal, "a 

party must make a timely and proper objection, 'stating the 

specific ground of objection, if the specific ground was not 

apparent from the context. ' 11 United States v. Mendoza-Salgado, 964 

F.2d 993, 1008 (10th Cir. 1992) (quoting United States v. Taylor, 

800 F.2d 1012, 1017 (10th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 838 

(1987)). It is doubtful whether an objection based on Rule 404(b} 

was clear from the context. In any event, an examination of the 

record shows that after Sanders's objection was overruled, the 

prosecution did not introduce the exhibit. Instead, it was 

introduced by Sanders during cross examination of Taylor. A party 

cannot profit on appeal from his own introduction of evidence at 

trial. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-2299 Document: 010110148705 Date Filed: 11/17/1992 Page: 2 
' l 

For the above reasons, Sanders's conviction is affirmed. 

-3-

Entered for the Court 

Donald P. Lay 

Senior Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 91-2299 Document: 010110148705 Date Filed: 11/17/1992 Page: 3