context: Mistakenly admitted evidence of pri- or crimes or convictions can, in some instances, "imping[e] upon the fundamental fairness of the trial itself." This court, however, as well as other circuits, has found that the improper admission of evidence of prior acts does not rise to the level of constitutional error if the trial judge later instructs the jury to disregard the evidence.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 761 F.2d 1124, 1127
citation_a.parenthetical: "This Court has held that such instructions to disregard often cure error."
citation_a.sentence: See Scrivner v. Tansy, 68 F.3d 1234, 1239-40 (10th Cir.1995); Warden v. Wyrick, 770 F.2d 112, 116 (8th Cir.1985); McAffee v. Procunier, 761 F.2d 1124, 1127 (5th Cir.1985) (“This Court has held that such instructions to disregard often cure error.”); cf. United States v. Parker, 604 F.2d 1327, 1329 (10th Cir.1979) (finding guilty verdict fundamentally unfair where the court improperly admitted evidence of prior conviction with no corrective instruction).
citation_b.signal: cf.
citation_b.identifier: 604 F.2d 1327, 1329
citation_b.parenthetical: finding guilty verdict fundamentally unfair where the court improperly admitted evidence of prior conviction with no corrective instruction
citation_b.sentence: See Scrivner v. Tansy, 68 F.3d 1234, 1239-40 (10th Cir.1995); Warden v. Wyrick, 770 F.2d 112, 116 (8th Cir.1985); McAffee v. Procunier, 761 F.2d 1124, 1127 (5th Cir.1985) (“This Court has held that such instructions to disregard often cure error.”); cf. United States v. Parker, 604 F.2d 1327, 1329 (10th Cir.1979) (finding guilty verdict fundamentally unfair where the court improperly admitted evidence of prior conviction with no corrective instruction).