Rape Shield Flashcards
**
412
the rape shield rule
(a) the following E is not admissible in a civil or criminal proceeding involving alleged SA
(1) E offered to prove that a V engaged in other sexual behavior; or
(2) E offered to prove a V’s sexual predisposition
(b) exceptions.
(1) the court may admit the following E in a criminal case
(A) E of specific instances of V sexual behavior, if offered to prove that someone other than the D was the source of physical evidence;
(B) E of specific instances of a V’s sexual behavior with respect to the person accused of the sexual misconduct, if offered by the D to prove consent or if offered by the prosecutor and
(C) E whose exclusion would violate the D’s const rights.
412 purpose
past acts are not probative since more probative E in the case being offered: the V testimony of no consent. so keep out the weak predispoisition E in th eface of the more powerful testimonial E
people v. Jovanovic
rape, kidnapping, assault after 1st date
before D & V had been sending emails
E: D offers 2 emails regarding S& M- TC excluded
Issue 1: case alleges sexual misconduct- yes
issue 2: case involving prior sexual behavior of V- yes
412 allows acts of sexual behavior to show consent
US v. Walker
Sexual explotation of a minor
E: D wants to admit E of V’s conversations with other men on dating website
TC excludes testimony as prior sexual activity by V
exceptions- D&V encounter before (to prove consent) and to show person other than the D was the source of E
Held: if D was to show specific instances that resulted in photos, would be ok
but instead, D wanted to show general idea that V spoke to others- out
State v. Smith
criminal attempt to commit indecent behvior
E: prior allegation of sexual assault made by this V, which were later recanted
TC says no false allegations, but even if there were abuse claims, out by rule 412
issues: should the prior allegaitons with alleged recantation have been admitted?
DA rule 412 keeps out becuase prior sex acts involving the same V
D/C: no bar under 412 because no sexual acts for false allegations
AC Notes: E of false prior claims not barred by rule 412
State v. Alvey
Rape
D offers W of prior situation when V falsely claimed rape
DA objections
1. prior sexual behavior of V
2. rule 608 SIC on cross only
D/C; 412 does not bar false prior allegatios
held: different than smith because in smith the prior was entirely fabircated. Here there was sexual evet in the past, the issue of consent was disputed- this is barred by 412
Olden v. Kentucky
Rape
E: D wants to cross V about V and W affair
interaction between 404b and 412
TC bars testimony; D convicted
D argues that barring testimony is a denial of fair trial
Is this E barred by 412?
Probably- prior sexual behavior of V
under 404b would be allowed because highy probative of bias/motive
supreme court on cross: reasonable cross part of 6th amendment
cross examiner traditionally allowed to impeach, allowed to have inquiry into bias
held: denial of cross on bias here denied fair trial. Confrintation clause trumps 412.
Stephens v. Miller
D&V in trailer and D claims fabrication, wants to introduce statements of D to V
res gestae
TC: D allowed to say he made statements, but not their content because of 412
D argues constitutional rights and narrative integrity
Issue 1; D’s right to testify may bow to other interests
issue 2; admissible as Res Gestae;
under 404b, would be allowed because highly probative- rejected- if this is allowed, lots of 412 E would be admitted as a result
US v. Knox
arrgavated SA
Defense is consent
E: D wants to introduce V prior sexual history through own testimony to show that D reasonably believed consent
D argues that shows state of mind and intent
held: D was trying to do what 412 prohibits. make V look like a bad or sexually deviant person. not critical to defense
note: usually not an issue because usually no mental state is required for consent issues
