Opinion ID: 608725
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Evidence of Extortionate Collection of Credit

Text: 28 LeMaux and Inrig, along with two others, were charged in Count III with conspiracy to collect credit by extortionate means. The jury acquitted all defendants of Count III. The defendants argue that the government knew it could not sustain its burden on Count III and only prosecuted that charge to gain admission of otherwise irrelevant evidence concerning the defendants' alleged violence in collecting drug debts. Defendants claim the improper prosecution on Count III requires reversal on the other counts. 29 This argument involves factual issues regarding the prosecution's state of mind. At no time in the district court did the defendants raise the issue of the effect of Count III evidence on Counts I and II. Issues not raised in the trial court generally cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. United States v. Flores-Payon, 942 F.2d 556, 558 (9th Cir.1991). The defendants do not satisfy any of the exceptions to this general waiver rule. Id. The issue has been waived. 30