United States Fourth Circuit

Conviction of defendant for drug related crimes is affirmed where: 1) without a showing that alleged intimidation prejudiced defendant, it cannot be found that the court's failure conduct voir dire following the allegations of intimidation affected his substantial rights; 2) the district court did not plainly err in finding that witness's methodology was sufficiently reliable to allow him to testify as an expert; 3) defendant failed to show that the alleged lack of clear distinction between the witness's role as a fact witness and his role as an expert witness actually affected the outcome of the trial; and 4) the district court did not plainly err in allowing the prosecutor's closing argument.

Appellate Information

• Argued 12/02/2009
• Decided 02/26/2010
• Published 02/26/2010

Judges

• Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:Gary Proctor, Law Offices of Gary E. Proctor, LLC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. John Francis Purcell, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. ON BRIEF:Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.