09-3558 U.S. v. Johnson

Listen to this article

Evidence
Relevance; undue prejudice

Where a defendant’s recorded telephone conversations from jail could be interpreted either innocently or as an attempt to intimidate the government’s informant, they were properly admitted at trial.

“Johnson claims that this conversation did in fact concern his attempts to sell a car and his hope that he could use the money from the sale to post bond. At trial, he presented evidence that he did, in fact, sell old cars that he fixed up. The Government counters by arguing that Johnson was actually describing the informant when he described the man trying to buy the car. The Government presented evidence that the informant, a white man, stayed at the Highway House and another motel that was near a middle school. Noting that Johnson would have known that he was being recorded, the Government argues that one could easily conclude that his vague references to selling the informant a car because that will help him “get out of here” are coded suggestions that his associate intimidate or threaten the informant. The district court agreed that such an interpretation was possible and reasonable, and thus admitted the recordings into evidence.”
“We agree with the district court that while Johnson did not explicitly instruct his associate to threaten the informant in the recordings, the jury could reasonably interpret the phone conversations in that manner. Thus, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the evidence was relevant.”

Affirmed.

09-3558 U.S. v. Johnson

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, Stiehl, J., Hibbler, J.

Full Text