CAMPANALE

v.

HARRIS, SUPERINTENDENT, GREEN HAVEN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Levario, 877 F.2d 1483 (10th Cir. 1989)
  …inez, 725 F. 2d 471, 475 (9th Cir.) (to constitute a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) it is only necessary to prove defendant knew he possessed a controlled substance even though he may be mistaken as to the specific type of substance), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 837, 105 S.Ct. 134, 83 L.Ed.2d 74 (1984). Moreover, it is permissible to infer that the driver of a vehicle has [*1486] knowledge of the contraband within it. United States v. Laughman, 618 F. 2d 1067, 1076 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 925, 100 S.…
• United States v. Bartlett, 856 F.2d 1071 (8th Cir. 1988)
  …sychiatric testimony). Second, Dr. Gannon’s statement was not admitted for the purpose of proving guilt but rather for the purpose of determining the basis of Dr. Gannon’s opinion. Cf. Watters v. Hubbard, 725 F. 2d 381, 386 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 837, 105 S.Ct. 133, 83 L.Ed.2d 74 (1984) (admitting psychiatrists’ testimony that defendant had admitted the offenses with which he was charged, “where the evidence was admitted not for the purpose of showing guilt, but to cross-examine and test the psy…
• United States v. Mickens, 926 F.2d 1323 (2d Cir. 1991)
  …dence were satisfied. The testimony about the hand gesture was not offered to prove Mickens’ bad character or criminal propensity, but rather to prove his consciousness of guilt. See United States v. Bein, 728 F. 2d 107, 114 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 837, 105 S.Ct. 135, 83 L.Ed.2d 75 (1984). The testimony was relevant since an effort to intimidate a key prosecution witness was probative of Mickens’ state of mind. Mickens argues that, because the testimony was that the threat was not directed at his…