United States Fourth Circuit

In a police officer's conviction for wrongful release of a police dog, the district court did not err in admitting, under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), evidence of two subsequent acts of intentional misuse of a police dog. Testimony of government's rebuttal expert did not exceed that allowed under the Rules.

Appellate Information

• Argued 12/06/2002
• Decided 02/03/2003
• Published 02/03/2003

Judges

• Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and James P. J ONES, United States District Judge for the Western District of Virginia, sitting by designation.

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Fred Warren Bennett, Bennett & Nathans, L.L.P., Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant.  Steven Michael Dettelbach, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Booth M. Ripke, Bennett & Nathans, L.L.P., Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant.  Thomas M. DiBiagio, United States Attorney, Sandra Wilkinson, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland;  Ralph F. Boyd, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Jessica Dunsay Silver, Gregory B. Friel, Appellate Section, Civil Rights Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.