United States v. Dwayne Love
449 F. App'x 338
5th Cir.2011Background
- Love was convicted of knowingly transporting, or attempting to transport, a person in interstate commerce for prostitution and aiding and abetting (18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 2421).
- Love appeals the district court’s admission of extrinsic evidence of prior prostitution involvement under Rule 404(b).
- The government offered extrinsic evidence to prove intent, not propensity, with Love pleading not guilty and disputing his intent to prostitute the individual.
- The extrinsic evidence involved Love being found with a young woman in a hotel room with a laptop, similar to the charged act and near in time (about one year before).
- The district court gave a limiting instruction prior to the extrinsic testimony and during jury deliberations, and other evidence supported the government’s theory of intent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 404(b) evidence was admissible for purposes other than character | Love contends the extrinsic evidence was inadmissible | Love argues the evidence was prejudicial and improper to show character | No abuse of discretion; evidence probative of intent under Beechum |
| Whether the Beechum two-prong test was satisfied | Love asserts insufficient probative value relative to prejudice | Government shows relevance to intent and corroboration | Yes; probative value not substantially outweighed by prejudice |
| Whether the extrinsic evidence was sufficiently similar to the charged offense | Love challenges similarity as too remote | Extrinsic act mirrors the charged conduct and supports intent | Yes; high overall similarity supports admission |
| Whether limiting instructions cured potential prejudice | Limiting instructions ineffective | Instructions minimized prejudice to the jury | Yes; instructions and corroborating testimony preserved admissibility |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Olguin, 643 F.3d 384 (5th Cir. 2011) (abuse-of-discretion standard for 404(b) evidence with heightened criminal-review)
- United States v. Beechum, 582 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1978) (two-prong Beechum test: relevance to an issue other than character; probative value not outweighed by prejudice)
- United States v. Chavez, 119 F.3d 342 (5th Cir. 1997) (corroboration and Beechum factors supported admission when other evidence was weak)