The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Paredes-Lio, 87 F.3d 1324 (9th Cir. 1996):
United States v. Mayans, 17 F.3d 1174, 1181 (9th Cir.1994); United States v. Bibo-Rodriguez, 922 F.2d 1398, 1400 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1234 (1991).
The second and third prongs of this test are easily met here. The drug transaction described by Paz occurred about two weeks before the charged incident, so it was not too remote in time. See, e.g., United States v. Houser, 929 F.2d 1369, 1373 (9th Cir.1990) (holding that a conviction four years before was not too remote in time; likewise, other uncharged drug transactions within a year of the offense were not too remote).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.