context: The challenged testimony here concerns acts that are unrelated to, and which occurred eight or more years before, the conduct charged. We conclude that the district court abused its discretion in admitting the testimony, even with a limiting instruction.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 683 F.2d 1215, 1215
citation_a.parenthetical: noting that reversal is required only when "the questioned evidence has no bearing on any of the issues included"
citation_a.sentence: See United States v. Harvey, 845 F.2d 760, 762 (8th Cir.1988) (finding that admission of testimony regarding uncharged drug and financial activities in tax prosecution ten years later constituted reversible error); see also Marshall, 683 F.2d at 1215 (noting that reversal is required only when “the questioned evidence has no bearing on any of the issues included”) (citations omitted).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 845 F.2d 760, 762
citation_b.parenthetical: finding that admission of testimony regarding uncharged drug and financial activities in tax prosecution ten years later constituted reversible error
citation_b.sentence: See United States v. Harvey, 845 F.2d 760, 762 (8th Cir.1988) (finding that admission of testimony regarding uncharged drug and financial activities in tax prosecution ten years later constituted reversible error); see also Marshall, 683 F.2d at 1215 (noting that reversal is required only when “the questioned evidence has no bearing on any of the issues included”) (citations omitted).