Opinion ID: 591847
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: use of the term check kiting

Text: 31 Henry asserts that the trial court erred in allowing the term check kiting to be used by the government, as it is not a cognizable federal criminal offense and its use prejudiced her case at trial. 32 A district court's decision to admit evidence is reviewed for abuse of discretion. United States v. Sanchez-Lopez, 879 F.2d 541, 553 (9th Cir.1989). A district court's denial of an in limine motion is also reviewed for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Wallace, 848 F.2d 1464 (9th Cir.1988). Similarly, a trial court's decision regarding the balancing test of Rule 403 is reviewed for abuse of discretion. United States v. Patterson, 819 F.2d 1495 (9th Cir.1982). 33 We disagree with Henry's assertions. First, any evidence of appellant's activities relating to the program to honor insufficient fund checks was relevant to the charges. Second, use of the term check kiting was minimal at trial. In light of the evidence supporting her conviction, Henry has failed to demonstrate any unfair prejudice by the term's use. 34