08-3306 U.S. v. Albiola

Listen to this article

Evidence
Other acts

Where a defendant is charged with using a communication facility in the commission of a controlled substance, other mailing labels are admissible to show intent.

“The other mailing labels in this case supported the inference that the fictitious address on the subject package was not accidental, and was instead an intentional act of concealment that Albiola had used repeatedly in the recent past. Further, Albiola was charged with attempt to possess drugs with intent to distribute, which required the government to prove that he acted with the specific intent to commit the underlying offense. United States v. Magana, 118 F.3d 1173, 1198 (7th Cir. 1997). ‘[W]hen a defendant is charged with a specific intent crime, the government may present other acts evidence to prove intent.’ United States v. Perkins, 548 F.3d 510, 514 (7th Cir. 2008). As we found in United States v. Brown, 250 F.3d 580, 585 (7th Cir. 2001), ‘intent is a material issue in this case, and subject to some restrictions not relevant here, the prosecution is entitled to establish it by using admissible evidence of their choosing.'”

Affirmed.

08-3306 U.S. v. Albiola

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Norgle, J., Williams, J.

Full Text