Opinion ID: 3156439
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Exclusion of Photos

Text: Finally, Mr. Brown argues that the district court erred in refusing to admit six photographs of an un-indicted coconspirator, Luis Anselmo Ortega-Flores, drinking and surrounded by women. We review a district court’s decision regarding the admissibility of evidence for abuse of discretion. Hinds v. Gen. Motors Corp., 988 F.2d 1039, 1047 (10th Cir. 1993) (citing Durtsche v. Am. Colloid Co., 958 F.2d 1007, 1011 (10th Cir. 1992)). At trial, the government objected to the photos as irrelevant. Counsel argued that the photos provided a contrast between his client’s lifestyle and the lavish lifestyle of Ortega-Flores. According to Mr. Brown, these photos tended to show that Mr. Brown could not be a member of the “Living Large” conspiracy because he was not “living large”—he did not benefit from the conspiracy’s rewards. The district court excluded the evidence as irrelevant to Mr. Brown’s membership in the conspiracy, -8- noting that the government had not put Mr. Brown’s lifestyle in issue. We find no abuse of discretion. The evidence was clearly tangential. AFFIRMED. Entered for the Court Paul J. Kelly, Jr.