Opinion ID: 528896
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Objection to Limiting Instruction

Text: 13 Restrepo argues that the judge's limiting instruction to the jury that it could consider prior criminal acts to prove his state of mind was improper. He argues that it unduly emphasized the evidence of prior acts. 14 The judge did not abuse his discretion in giving the instruction. First, a judge may give a limiting instruction sua sponte. See United States v. Aims Back, 588 F.2d 1283, 1287 (9th Cir.1979). Second, the judge here weighed competing concerns properly. Third, there is a presumption that the jury follows the instructions. See McKenzie v. Risley, 842 F.2d 1525, 1533 n. 16 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 109 S.Ct. 250, 102 L.Ed.2d 239 (1988). There was no error.