Opinion ID: 599011
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Evidence of Nephew's Involvement

Text: 37 Rodriguez claims that because Huaro acted as a broker in negotiating the purchase of cocaine for his nephew, the district court erred in refusing Rodriguez' inquiry into the nephew's arrest for drug offenses. He asserts that this evidence affects Huaro's credibility. 38 The trial court is given broad discretion in determining whether evidence is relevant and whether the probative value of the evidence outweighs any unfair prejudice.... United States v. Abreu, 962 F.2d 1425, 1436 (10th Cir.1992). We hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in this instance. The district court indicated that there was no evidence in the record linking the nephew and Rodriguez. As such, we affirm the trial court's denial of this line of inquiry.