United States v. Pinales-Lopez ( 1999 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-50808
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LUIS PINALES-LOPEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. DR-97-CR-454-1
- - - - - - - - - -
July 22, 1999
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Luis Pinales-Lopez was found guilty by jury verdict of
assault on an officer, enhanced penalty, and was sentenced to 45
months’ imprisonment, three years’ supervised release, and no
fine. He argues on appeal that the district court erred by
allowing the prosecutor to cross-examine him regarding his two
prior arrests for illegal entry into the United States. We give
the district court’s evidentiary rulings great deference and
review them for an abuse of discretion. United States v.
Anderson, 933 F.2d 1261, 1267-68 (5th Cir. 1991).
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 98-50808
- 2 -
Evidence of extrinsic offenses is not admissible to prove
the character of a person in order to show that he acted in
conformity therewith but may be admitted for other purposes.
Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). The Government concedes that the evidence
in the instant case does not fall within the scope of Fed. R.
Evid. 608 and 609 but argues that it was admissible under the
exceptions listed in Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). However, because the
Government failed to provide reasonable notice of its intended
use of this evidence, the Government’s argument fails. See Fed.
R. Evid. 404(b).
The erroneous admission of extrinsic evidence is reviewed
under the harmless-error doctrine. United States v. Liu, 960
F.2d 449, 452 (5th Cir. 1992). A nonconstitutional trial error
is harmless unless it had “substantial and injurious effect or
influence in determining the jury’s verdict.” Kotteakos v.
United States, 328 U.S. 750, 776 (1946). Given the significant
amount of evidence of Pinales-Lopez’s guilt, we find that any
error in admitting the evidence of Pinales-Lopez’s prior arrests
was harmless.
AFFIRMED.