context: Therefore, Harris contends, the case must be remanded for the district court to make this Rule 403 determination. We disagree. Under the circumstances, the interest in judicial economy, combined with the fact that this is not a close question, lead us to conduct the Rule 403 balancing.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 612 F.2d 73, 80
citation_a.parenthetical: "[W]e have viewed the evidence ... with our own eyes, and can judge the likely prejudice resulting from it as well as the trial judge."
citation_a.sentence: See US v. Schiff, 612 F.2d 73, 80 (2d Cir.1979) (“[W]e have viewed the evidence ... with our own eyes, and can judge the likely prejudice resulting from it as well as the trial judge.”); cf. US v. Sriyuth, 98 F.3d 739, 748 n. 15 (3d Cir.1996) (“[W]e must make this determination in the first instance as the district court record is devoid of any references to a Rule 403 analysis.”).
citation_b.signal: cf.
citation_b.parenthetical: "[W]e must make this determination in the first instance as the district court record is devoid of any references to a Rule 403 analysis."
citation_b.sentence: See US v. Schiff, 612 F.2d 73, 80 (2d Cir.1979) (“[W]e have viewed the evidence ... with our own eyes, and can judge the likely prejudice resulting from it as well as the trial judge.”); cf. US v. Sriyuth, 98 F.3d 739, 748 n. 15 (3d Cir.1996) (“[W]e must make this determination in the first instance as the district court record is devoid of any references to a Rule 403 analysis.”).