## Facts

- David Dean was tried in federal court for unlawful possession of a firearm.
- The government called Deputy Needham to explain the investigation and the search that led to finding the firearm.
- Needham testified that Darryl Long told him Dean had extorted money from Long at gunpoint in a mobile home owned by Dean’s wife.
- Dean objected that Needham’s recounting of Long’s statements was inadmissible hearsay.
- The district court overruled the objection and admitted the statements with a limiting instruction that they were offered only to show why Needham searched the mobile home, not to prove the extortion occurred.
- Dean’s wife testified she consented to the search of the property where the firearm was found.
- A jury convicted Dean of the firearm possession charge.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court erred by admitting, through an officer’s testimony, a third party’s out-of-court accusation on the theory it was offered only for its effect on the listener (to explain the officer’s conduct), rather than for its truth.
2. Whether the accusation was irrelevant and/or unduly prejudicial where the officer’s reasons for searching were not a fact of consequence at trial.
3. If admission was error, whether it was harmless.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit reversed the conviction.
- The court held the district court abused its discretion by admitting Long’s out-of-court accusations through Deputy Needham.
- The “effect on the listener” rationale did not supply meaningful relevance to a disputed issue, and the accusation carried a substantial risk of unfair prejudice as evidence of uncharged violent conduct.
- The limiting instruction did not cure the problem given the inflammatory content of the accusation.
- The error was not harmless because the accusation was central to the government’s presentation and likely affected the verdict.

## Legal Principles

- Appellate review of a district court’s evidentiary ruling admitting evidence over a hearsay objection is for abuse of discretion.
- An out-of-court statement offered to show its effect on the listener, rather than for the truth of what it asserts, is not hearsay.
- Even if a statement is non-hearsay, it must be relevant to a fact of consequence to be admissible; irrelevant evidence is inadmissible.
- Highly prejudicial accusations of other crimes may be excluded where their probative value for a legitimate, disputed issue is minimal and the risk of unfair prejudice is substantial.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit reversed Dean’s firearm-possession conviction because the district court improperly allowed an officer to relay a third party’s gunpoint-extortion accusation under an “effect on the listener” theory when the officer’s motives were not genuinely at issue, making the evidence irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial, and the error was not harmless.


United States v. Dean, 980 F.2d 1286 (9th Cir. 1992)