# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 7- 36 14

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.
Reym un do Mart in ez-C as ti ll o, al so kn own as El Gato

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of Ne br as ka - Lin co ln

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Nov em

be r 12 , 20 18 Fi le d: Feb ru ary 13 , 20 19 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re BENTON, BEAM, an d ERI CKSON, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Fo ll owi ng hi s jury c o n v i c t io n an d se nt en ce fo r di st rib ut io n of fiv e gr am s or

m or e of act ua l m et ha m

ph et am in e in vi ol at io n of 21 U.S.C

. § § 8 4 1( a)(1 ) an d84 1( b) (1 ), Reym un do Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo ap pe al s th e di st ric t co ur t's de ni al of hi s pr e- 1
tri al m ot io n in li m in e co nc ern in g t he ad m is si on of e vi de nc e o f ot he r cri m es at tri al

. W e aff irm.

A jury co nv ic te d Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo of di st rib ut io n of m et ha m ph et am in e f

o r

se ll in g m et ha m

ph et am in e to a co nf

id en ti al in fo rm an t (CI) in Gran d Is la nd
, Neb ras ka
,
on Mar ch 27
, 20 12

. On th at da te , th e CI ha d arra ng ed to bu y th e dr ug s fro m an ot he r

m an bu t whe n th e CI arri ve d at th e ag reed -u po n lo cat io n fo r th e bu y , it was Mar ti ne zCas ti l l o t h a t met th e CI an d co m pl et ed th e tra ns act io n. The se th ree m en (th e CI,
Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo
, an d th e CI's in it ia l co nt act ) en ga ge d in ad di ti on al tra ns act io ns du rin g th is Mar ch 20 12 ti m e fram e. The CI's in it ia l co nt act was al so arre st ed an d ch arg ed wit h di st rib ut io n cri m es a n d te st ifi ed at tri al ag ai ns t Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo
pu rs ua nt to a co op erat io n a gr eem en t.

Pri or to tri al
, th e go ve rn m en t ga ve no ti ce to Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo th at it in te nd ed

to in tro du ce ev id en ce o f o t h e r cri m es , wro ng s or act s, pu rs ua nt to Fed eral Ru le of Evi de nc e 40 4, as a res ul t of te st im on y fro m th e CI's in it ia l co nt act . This te st im on y

was th at Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo de al t m et ha m ph et am in e fo r hi m on m or e th an on e

oc cas io n du rin g th e r e l e v a n t ti m e. Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo arg ue d th at th e pr op os ed

ev id en ce sh ou ld be ex cl ud ed
, as it was ex tri ns ic to th e cri m e ch arg ed an d was un du ly
pr ejud ic ia l. The di st ric t co ur t d is ag reed an d a ll owe d t he ev id en ce, n ot in g:

The ev id en ce of pr eex is ti ng an d an on go in g rel at io ns hi p be twee n [th e te st ifyin g wit ne ss ] an d th e de fen da nt is ob vi ou sl y rel at ed to th e ch arg ed of fen se an d es ta bl is he s ne ces s a r y c o nt ex t fo r th at of fen se

. It ex pl ai ns ho w an d why th e de fen da nt wou ld ha ve ap pe ared to co ns um m at e th at

– th e cri m e th at – t ha t ha s be en ch arg ed an d t ha t h as be en arra ng ed wit h [th e te st ifyin g wi tn es s].

The Hon or ab le Jo hn M. Gerra rd
, Ch ie f Ju dg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r 1 th e Dis tri ct of Ne br as ka

. -2

-The co ur t al lo wed th e te st im on y , al on g wit h ad di ti on al te st im on y reg ard in g

Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo 's in vo lv em en t in "t wo or th ree" bu y s an d act iv it ie s on da te s

su rro un di ng th e ch arg ed da te , ov er Ma rti ne z-Ca st il lo 's o bjec ti on s at tri al

. The jury

co nv ic te d Mar ti n e z
- C a s ti ll o of th e of fen se co nd uc t. On ap pe al
, Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo

ren ews his argu m en t th at th e ev id en ce in tro du ced by th e go ve rn m en t at tri al reg ard in g

an y tra ns act io n fo r m et ha m ph et am in e sa le ot he r th an th at whi ch oc cu rred on Mar ch
2 7 , 20 12
, was ex tri ns ic to th e cri m e ch arg ed an d sh ou ld ha ve be en an al y ze d u n d e r Ru le s 40 4( b) an d 40 3 fo r it s ad m is si bi li ty. Had th e co ur t co nd uc te d th a t a n a l ysi s, cl ai m s Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo
, it wou ld ha ve co nc lu de d th at th e in fo rm at io n so ug ht fro m th e te st ifyin g wi tn es s was un du ly prejud ic ia l an d s ho ul d h av e b een ex cl ud ed

.

W e rev ie w th e di st ric t co ur t's ev id en ti ary ru li ng s fo r an ab us e of di sc ret io n an d fin d no ne he r e

. F e r g u s o n v. Uni te d St at es , 48 4 F.3 d 10 68
, 10 74 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ). Dis tri ct co ur ts ha ve "b ro ad di sc ret io n in ad m it ti ng su ch ev id en ce an d wil l be rev ers ed

on ly i f su ch ev id en ce c l e a r ly h ad no be ari ng on th e cas e an d was in tro du ced so le ly

to pr ov e th e de fe n d a n t ' s pr op en si ty to co m m it cri m in al act s." Uni te d St at es v. Tho m as , 76 0 F.3 d 87 9, 88 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 14 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Katz , 44 5 F.3 d 10 23
, 10 29 (8 th Cir . 20 06 )). As the di st ric t cou rt reco gn iz ed
, Ru le 40 4( b) do es no t

ex cl ud e ev id en ce of pr io r ba d act s th at are pr ob at iv e of th e ch arg ed cri m e; it ap pl ie s

on ly to ex tri ns ic
, no t in tri ns ic ev id en ce. Id

. "Ev id en ce of ot he r wro ng fu l co nd uc t is

co ns i d ered in tri ns ic whe n it is of fere d fo r th e pu rp os e of pr ov id in g th e co nt ex t in whi ch th e ch arg ed cri m e oc cu rred

. . . [an d] is ad m it te d be cau se th e ot he r cri m e

ev id en ce co m

pl et es th e st or y or pr ov id es a to ta l pi ct ur e of th e ch arg ed cri m e." Uni te d St at es v. You ng , 75 3 F.3 d 75 7, 77 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 14 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Jo hn so n, 46 3 F.3 d 80 3, 80 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ) (in te rn al qu ot at io ns om it te d) ). "In tri ns ic ev id en ce

m ay he lp to fil l th e ga ps in th e jury's un de rs ta nd in g of th e cri m e ch arg ed ." Id

. Here,

we ag ree wit h th e di st ric t co ur t th at th e ev id en ce of Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo 's li m it ed
, ot he r in vo lv em en t in dr ug di st rib ut io n wit h th e sa m e pa rti es aro un d th e ti m e pe rio d of th e ch arg ed co nd uc t co nt rib ut es to th e na rrat iv e of th e st or y an d pr ov id es co nt ex t whe re

-3

-th e jury m ig ht ot he rwis e ha ve ha d a l i mi t ed pi ct ur e. As th e di st ric t co ur t he ld
, th e

te st im on y th at Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo de li ve red dr ug s fo r th e CI's in it ia l co nt act "[m ]ay be

two or th ree ti m es " pr ov id ed an ex pl an at io n as to why Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo

co ns um m at ed th e tra ns act io n wit h th e CI on Mar ch 27
, 20 12

. The di st ric t co ur t di d

no t err in ad m it ti ng th e ch al le ng ed ev id en ce ov er M a rti ne z-Ca st il lo 's Ru le 40 4( b) ob jecti on s be cau se th e ev id en ce p r o v i d e d in tri ns ic ev id en ce of Mar ti ne z-Ca st il lo 's of fen se

.

Fo r th e rea so ns st at ed he rei n, we af fir m

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-4

-