Opinion ID: 220344
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Testimony Regarding Marrero's Struggle with Police

Text: Marrero next asserts that the district court erred by allowing the arresting officers to testify about their struggle with Marrero when they found and tried to detain him. According to Marrero, this testimony constituted character evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts, and is therefore inadmissible under Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Because Marrero failed to object to this issue at trial, we review it for plain error under Rule 52(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 129 S.Ct. 1423, 1429, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009). To establish plain error, Marrero must show an error that was clear or obvious, that affected [his] substantial rights, and that `seriously affect[ed] the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.' Id. (quoting United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 736, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993)). Meeting all four prongs is difficult, as it should be. Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). Rule 404(b) provides that [e]vidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. Fed.R.Evid. 404(b). Where the challenged evidence is `intrinsic' to, or `inextricably intertwined' with evidence of, the crime charged, Rule 404(b) is not applicable. United States v. Henderson, 626 F.3d 326, 338 (6th Cir. 2010). That is: Proper background evidence has a causal, temporal or spatial connection with the charged offense. Typically, such evidence is a prelude to the charged offense, is directly probative of the charged offense, arises from the same events as the charged offense, forms an integral part of a witness's testimony, or completes the story of the charged offense. United States v. Hardy, 228 F.3d 745, 748 (6th Cir.2000). The circumstances under which police officers apprehended Marrero are inextricably intertwined with evidence of the possession crimes with which he was later charged. See Henderson, 626 F.3d at 338. Marrero's attempt to hide from police officers inside a dryer, the officers' discovery of Marrero, and the ensuing struggle all have a temporal connection to, and completes the story of, the charged offense. See Hardy, 228 F.3d at 748. Therefore, it was not error, let alone plain error, for the district court to allow the admission of this evidence.