discussed Cited "see" United States v. Ripinsky See United States v. Freeman, 6 F.3d 586, 599 (9th Cir.1993) (concluding that there was no abuse of discretion by not excising testimony concerning inextricably intertwined other crimes, even though the evidence could have been excised without preventing the government from being able to put the testimony in context), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 1661 , 128 L.Ed.2d 378 & 511 U.S. 1147 , 114 S.Ct. 2177 , 128 L.Ed.2d 896 (1994).

discussed Cited "see" 46 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1042, 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2275, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4131 United States of America v. Juri Ripinsky, United States of America v. J. Malcolm Kingston See United States v. Freeman, 6 F.3d 586, 599 (9th Cir.1993) (concluding that there was no abuse of discretion by not excising testimony concerning inextricably intertwined other crimes, even though the evidence could have been excised without preventing the government from being able to put the testimony in context), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 1661 , 128 L.Ed.2d 378 & 511 U.S. 1147 , 114 S.Ct. 2177 , 128 L.Ed.2d 896 (1994).