United States v. Hammond
This text of 194 F. App'x 670 (United States v. Hammond) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Larry Dion Hammond appeals his convictions on one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine and two counts of possession with intent to distribute cocaine. Hammond argues that the district court erred by refusing to grant a mistrial after government witnesses, on two separate occasions, incidentally made improper references to his criminal record. The district court gave a curative instruction after the first objection, but declined to do so after the second so as not to highlight the improper testimony. Having considered the briefs and after reviewing the record, we doubt that the improper testimony substantially influenced the jury’s guilty verdicts, given the weight of the evidence. We also find no indication of prosecutorial misconduct in procuring the testimony. Furthermore, we find no abuse of the district court’s discretion in refusing to grant a mistrial.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
194 F. App'x 670, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hammond-ca11-2006.