Opinion ID: 2175676
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: II: Drew Evidence

Text: The central issue raised by both appellants concerns the scope of admission of evidence pertaining to the drug operation and the drug debt which precipitated the murder. [5] The trial court entertained the government's motion to admit such evidence by separating all of the proposed evidence into categories A through E, and, as mentioned above, admitting some but not other evidential categories. The court did not permit the introduction of evidence from Category A (evidence that Bullock led a drug distribution organization and the operating rules of the business) or Category B (evidence that Johnson was the lieutenant and enforcer of the organization). [6] The court did, however, admit evidence from Category C (the dispute over the heroin sale in November and whether payment was made for it and follow-up attempts to obtain payment for it), Category D (evidence that it was Johnson who shot Smith while Bullock aided and abetted), [7] and Category E (evidence that a gun similar to that used to murder Smith was seen in Bullock's car a few days after the murder). The trial court reaffirmed its commitment to this plan for admission of Drew evidence at various points in the trial, although it amended the scope of the permissibly admitted evidence within Category C as the trial proceeded and objections or motions for mistrial were made. [8]