Opinion ID: 617962
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Whether the District Court Abused Its Discretion in Admitting Some of Lt. Stark's Testimony

Text: At trial, Mr. Irving objected when the government asked Lt. Stark about his involvement in a prior drug-related investigation of Mr. Irving. During the ensuing bench conference, the government maintained that this evidence was intrinsic to the charged crime, arguing that it was necessary to explain how Mr. Irving became aware of Lt. Stark and what might have led him to solicit Lt. Stark's death at a party in 2006. R., Vol. II, at 243. The district court agreed that the testimonial evidence is intrinsic, and overruled Mr. Irving's objection. Id. at 243-44. Lt. Stark then testified about his part in a 2005 controlled buy of crack cocaine involving Mr. Irving, and explained how it was at his behest that Mr. Irving was eventually prosecuted as a result of the crime, despite problems with the cooperating witness. [24]