United States v. Lamon Lee Christensen

87 F.3d 1323 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lamon Lee CHRISTENSEN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50625. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 8, 1996. Decided June 26, 1996. Before: REINHARDT, KOZINSKI and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 The district court refused to allow Garrick to testify, holding that his testimony wouldn't be helpful to the jury because the jury could read medical records for themselves, and determine for themselves how the robber behaved. R.T. 7/12/94 at 11-15. The district court also ruled that Garrick's testimony wasn't relevant to identification, id. at 12, and that it was inadmissible because it was based on hearsay, id. at 14. The district court erred. 3 As an expert psychologist, Dr. Garrick was entitled to rely on hearsay in reaching his opinions. See Fed.R.Evid. 703. To the extent he mentioned evidence not before the jury, a limiting…