# United States v. Campbell

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · April 4, 1995 · 49 F.3d 1079

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9413560

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Lynn CAMPBELL, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** April 4, 1995
- **Citations:** 49 F.3d 1079; 1995 WL 144119
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Barksdale
- **Judges:** Smith, Barksdale, Parker
- **Cited by:** 53 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9413560

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding evidence of drugs provided to complainants by defendant while defendant allegedly transported complainants involved in prostitution to be “relevant intrinsic evidence of how the actual violation occurred”
- affirming district court's ruling that the probative value of evidence regarding how a defendant "used drugs and violence to control the women and make them prostitute for him” outweighed its prejudicial effect
- describing a similar pattern of treatment in a sex trafficking context

## Opinion text

RHESA HAWKINS BARKSDALE, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I concur. But, in my opinion, it is most arguable that we should review the motion for aequittal/element of the offense issue only for plain error, because Campbell did not later object to the jury instruction on this point. Cf. United States v. Graves, 5 F.3d 1546, 1551-53 (5th Cir.1993) (reviewing for plain error where defendant did not make contemporaneous objection to admission of evidence that was subject of earlier ruling on motion in limine).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9413560. Public record. Not legal advice.