Opinion ID: 581055
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Remoteness in time

Text: 10 Scalco also contends that his prior drug involvement was too remote in time to be probative in this case, though he cites no cases in support of this proposition. Scalco's drug manufacturing conviction occurred seven years prior to the offense and eight years prior to the trial. The marijuana conviction occurred two years prior to this offense and three years prior to the trial. Scalco began as an informant seven years prior to the offense; there was no testimony as to how long he acted as an informant. This Court has held that evidence of involvement with drugs eight years prior to a trial for another drug conspiracy could be admitted to show intent. United States v. Rawle, 845 F.2d 1244, 1246-48 (4th Cir. 1988). Therefore, Scalco's prior drug involvement was not too remote in time to be probative in this case.