Opinion ID: 214071
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Admission of Recordings of Moore Rapping

Text: Moore also contends that the district court erred in admitting the recordings of him rapping. He argues that the recordings were improper character evidence that should have been excluded under Rule 404(b). The government argues that the recordings were admissible without limitation because Moore's lyrics constituted evidence of the charged conspiracy. Because Moore failed to object at trial, we review the admission of the recordings for plain error. United States v. Faulkner, 636 F.3d 1009, 1017-18 (8th Cir. 2011). We reverse only if there was an error that was plain and that affected [Moore's] substantial rights and if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id. (quoting United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (internal quotation marks omitted)). Even if the recordings constituted evidence of prior bad acts, they were nonetheless admissible under Rule 404(b). Moore maintained that he was not involved in a drug conspiracy, and he testified that he never bought or sold crack cocaine or cocaine. The recordings were relevant to prove that he knew cocaine prices, used drug code words, and sold drugs to supplement his income. Accordingly, the evidence was admissible to show his knowledge of drug distribution and his motive for engaging in it. See Fed.R.Evid. 404(b). Additionally, Moore contends that the recordings should have been excluded as unduly prejudicial under Federal Rule of Evidence 403, which provides that even relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Some of Moore's lyrics tended to show that he knew cocaine prices, used drug code words, and sold drugs to supplement his income. Countering the probative value of that evidence, however, was the danger of unfair prejudice flowing from the lyrics used by Moore and the other rappers, which were replete with vulgar, inflammatory, prejudicial language, most of which was irrelevant to whether Moore was involved in a drug distribution conspiracy. Cf. United States v. Gamory, 635 F.3d 480, 493 (11th Cir.2011) (The lyrics presented a substantial danger of unfair prejudice because they contained violence, profanity, sex, promiscuity, and misogyny and could reasonably be understood as promoting a violent and unlawful lifestyle.) Altogether, the recordings were some twenty minutes in length, and they were shown to the jury without limitation or a limiting instruction. See Fed.R.Evid. 105. Because there was no Rule 403 objection, we review for plain error. See Olano, 507 U.S. at 734, 113 S.Ct. 1770 (`Plain' is synonymous with `clear' or, equivalently, `obvious.'). Assuming for purposes of discussion that the recordings should not have been admitted, we conclude that, in light of the overwhelming evidence against him, Moore has failed to persuade us that the recordings affected the outcome of the district court proceedings. See id. (holding that under plain error review the defendant bears the burden of persuasion with respect to prejudice). We thus conclude that their admission did not affect Moore's substantial rights.