Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01084/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01084-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Oscar F. Lawrence
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

,, . FI LED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Cirruit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

J N 2 7 1990 

&OBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

OSCAR F. LAWRENCE, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

No. 89-1084 

(D.C. No. 88-CR-326-1) 

(D. Colo.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before TACHA and EBEL, Circuit Judges, and SEAY,** Chief District 

Judge. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Oscar Lawrence appeals his conviction of possession with 

intent to distribute "crack'' cocaine in excess of five grams, see 

21 U.S.C. §§ 84l(a)(l), 84l(b)(l)(B)(iii). Lawrence contends the 

district court erred in admitting an ''enhanced" tape recording of 

* 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. 

** The Honorable Frank H. Seay, Chief District Judge, United 

States District Court for Eastern District of Oklahoma, sitting by 

designation. 

Appellate Case: 89-1084 Document: 010110037456 Date Filed: 06/27/1990 Page: 1 
I 

conversations between the defendant and a government informant. 

Lawrence further contends that the court erred by permitting 

evidence of other acts, which occurred two months later, under 

Rule 404(b), Fed.R.Evid. 404(b). We affirm. 

Admission of audio tape recordings is governed by United 

States~ Mittleider, 835 F.2d 769 (10th Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 

U.S. ---, 108 S. Ct. 1279 (1988). Tapes will be admitted at 

the sound discretion of the district court unless the 

unintelligible portions of the tape are "so substantial as to 

render untrustworthy the recording as a whole." Id. at 773. We 

have reviewed the tape and find that it does not violate this 

standard. Nor do we find that the absence of the instruction 

found in United States v. Robinson, 707 F.2d 872, 878 (6th Cir. 

1983), requires reversal; the jury was properly instructed that 

only the tape, and not the transcript, was evidence. Nor did 

defendant's counsel request additional instructions. There is no 

error in the district court's handling of the tape. 

Admission of other acts evidence is controlled by our recent 

case of United States~ Record, 873 F.2d 1363 (10th Cir. 1989); 

see also United States~ Martinez, 890 F.2d 1088 (10th Cir. 

1989), which adopts the analytical approach used by the United 

States Supreme Court in Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 861 

(1988). Record notes that Huddleston rejected an exclusionary 

approach to other acts evidence in favor of an inclusionary 

approach. Record, 873 F.2d at 1374 ("Congress was more concerned 

with avoiding restrictions on the admission of 404(b) evidence 

than with potential prejudice. . "). We hold that the 

2 

Appellate Case: 89-1084 Document: 010110037456 Date Filed: 06/27/1990 Page: 2 
I 

government properly sought admission of evidence of defendant's 

subsequent possession of cocaine to show identity and intent. We 

also determine that the incidents are sufficiently "close in time" 

to meet the requirements of United States~ Hogue, 827 F.2d 660 

(10th Cir. 1987). Hogue itself involved a delay of approximately 

five weeks between the bank robbery the defendant in that case was 

prosecuted for and the other bank robbery introduced into 

evidence. Moreover, the logical relevance of showing Lawrence's 

possession of drugs and paraphernalia is, if anything, greater to 

Lawrence's conviction for possession with intent to distribute 

than the Hogue defendant's participation in another bank robbery 

was to his conviction. We find no error in the district court's 

admission of the other acts evidence pursuant to Rule 404(b). 

Lawrence's motion to supplement the record is GRANTED. The 

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 

3 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 89-1084 Document: 010110037456 Date Filed: 06/27/1990 Page: 3