U.S. v. Dillard

In prosecution on drug distribution charges, Dist. Ct. did not err in failing to further curb certain references by witnesses to term “gang” and/or “Hobo gang.” Although there is substantial risk of unfair prejudice attached to gang affiliation evidence, no error occurred here, where govt. introduced no direct evidence of defendant’s gang membership or evidence of Hobo gang itself. Moreover, although Dist. Ct. allowed prosecutor to cross-examine witness about defendant’s relationship to others who were in gang, response of witness did not show common gang membership with respect to defendant and said individuals, and prosecutor’s question was otherwise intended to establish witness’ bias, which was proper subject matter for prosecutor to explore. Dist. Ct. also did not err in dismissing only one juror who admitted to seeing media account of instant trial that identified defendant and others as members of Hobo gang. Fact that Dist. Ct. admonished jurors only three times during trial to avoid media or extra-record material and did not repeat admonition after juror was excused did not require different result, where Dist. Ct. reminded jurors at end of trial to consider only evidence in record, and where there was consensus among counsel during trial that Dist. Ct.’s questioning of jurors about instant online article was sufficient.