Evidence- Character Evidence Flashcards
403 Balance of Character Evidence
Very prejudicial because we try actions, not people.
Not very probative either because character has nothing to do with actions
Rule 404(a)
Can never use character evidence to prove propensity. (He is careful so didn’t commit fraud).
Prior Bad Acts
in CIVIL CASE- Can be used if have good purpose. Like trying to give other reason for emotional stress so cite drug use. Still must go through a 403.
Exception to 403(a)
When character is in issue then one can use character evidence. For example in libel type cases.
Can use reputation, opinion, or specific instances of conduct.
Criminal Cases
Can never use character evidence. If bring in nickname of D like “monster” then might not be allowed unless for specific reason to help the jury.
Exception in Criminal Case
Can be brought in by the D if the trait is PERTINENT to the crime. Like saying the D is gentle when the crime is brutal murder.
Keep in mind, you open the door and the prosecution can walk through it only as much as you open it. If you open in wide, you run the risk of getting slammed!
If D says “i didn’t” vs “i couldn’t” it might open the door differently.
Same applies if D offers evidence pertinent to crime about the V. The prosecution can hit back with contrary evidence about the V or evidence that D has same trait.
D can offer evidence not for propensity of V but for reason like notice of violence in which case the door is not open to attack D’s character.
405(a) cross examination
If there is a character witness, prosecution can bring in pertinent bad act and ask if W knows about it. Can do this because this can impeach the witness’ cred.
Need good faith belief that action happened.
404(b) Bad Acts
Evidence of other crimes may be admissible for non-character purposes. For example, proof of motive or intent.
Prosecution must provide reasonable notice AND show their reason before giving the evidence.
404(b) Four steps
(A) Proper Purpose must be identified that is in dispute/relevant to the case
(B) Explain how the evidence is probative of the not-for character purpose
(C) Explain how it fits Into a chain of inferences that does not go through propensity
(D) Judge can admit if the Govt can show by a preponderance of the evidence that the other act was committed (Huddleston); Judge conducts 403 analysis and must provide a limiting instruction to not use for propensity if D requests it (Rule 105)
(1) 403 Analysis: D will argue that even if admitted for a proper purpose, the jury will misuse it for the propensity inference or as evidence that D is a bad person, prejudicing D; also can delay/cause jury confusion (trial in a trial); the degree to which non-propensity issue is actually disputed will affect the probative value of the other act evidence (if not in dispute, probative value is low); Court will consider if there are less prejudicial alternative (Old Chief)
Permissible Purposes to Bring in Character Evidence
Identity- like a calling card of crime. However, it must be a very very specific way of committing the crime.
Plan- Stole a car before robbery to show the plan of the robbery (NOT, he stole so he will steal again).
Context- To prove D is good with guns, brings in case where he shot small target from several feet away. Helps show current crime wasn’t a mistake.
Motive- Bring in crime of getting sex for prescriptions to show why he wrote illegal prescriptions. Financial motive from drug use not good enough motive (we all want more money).
Mental State- old crimes show his current state of mind. (didnt intend to return stolen goods).
Permissible Pursposes- Drug Cases
Auto View- Admissible even if intent is not in dispute.
Active Contest- If intent is not contested (just because I deny dealing the drugs doesn’t mean i deny they were intended for distribution) then cannot be introduced.
Defense should not contest intent until their closing so the P cant bring this evidence.
Doctrine of Chances
If the same act happened many times then it can be brought to show high probability he did it (7 wives drowned in bath).
Commonality of Intent
If intent is common to both crimes then can be introduced. For example, intent to distribute cocaine is the same as intent to distribute crack.
Prior Act to show Knowledge
Prior acts can be used to show that the act was not done by accident. (evidence of previous choke-hold is allowed to show he knew how to choke).
Uncharged Conduct
Does not matter if the D was convicted of the prior conduct. Must see if reasonable minds would say it happened (POE lower standard).
Even if he was acquitted, there may be a lower standard of proof and therefore it can be admitted.
Prior arrest is not permitted.
Rule 104(b) requires proof that fact exists is a tool judges can use to prevent this evidence.
