U.S. v. Saunders

In prosecution on drug conspiracy charge, Dist. Ct. erred in admitting govt.’s expert’s fingerprint testimony, where expert failed to sufficiently disclose, as required under Rule 16, basis of said testimony that concerned number of Galton “verification” points that expert used to make determination that latent fingerprints found on drug-related items matched defendants’ fingerprints. Record showed that expert used said verification points to form his opinion and failure to disclose actual number of said points may have hindered defendant’s ability to attack expert’s identification. However, said error was harmless given other evidence linking defendants to crime scene that included video surveillance and physical evidence contained in trash pulls. Moreover, Dist. Ct. did not commit plain error in admitting stipulation relating to flight and traffic stop of two co-conspirators who were observed fleeing drug house and throwing out drug packets during flight. While defendants argued that such evidence was irrelevant, Dist. Ct. could properly find that such evidence was relevant to establish that defendants and others used said residence to distribute drugs (Partial dissent filed.)