Evidence-Wellborn SU2008 Case Briefs

Evidence-Wellborn SU2008 Case Briefs - U.S v Johnson(5th...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
U.S. v. Johnson (5th Cir. 1977) -pg. 6 -ct found that evidence that overpaid his taxes due to not claiming some legal deductions leads to the conclusion that he relied on his accountants through inference and, therefore, “is only indirectly probative of reliance” -is this then a ? of irrelevance? -direct evidence of reliance was allowed -ct said that submitting evidence would’ve violated 403 b/c it could’ve resulted in unfair prejudice by appealing to the emotions of the jury, could confuse the issue b/c tax liability wasn’t related to the charges, and it could’ve been a waste of time -note 1 – following 402, “the essential prerequisite of admissibility is relevance” -relevance is determined by whether it makes a fact that is of consequence to the outcome of the case more or less probable – 401 -govt dropped all of the evasion counts before the trial probably b/c wanted to offer evidence that he didn’t underpay his taxes; claimed that he actually overpaid -in a false statement case, whether you paid all your taxes is irrelevant; elements of crime is that there was a false statement on the return and you knew it was false -said that the fact that he overpaid was evidence of the fact that he just didn’t pay attention to what was on the return and, therefore, didn’t intentionally make a false statement -there was other evidence that he withheld info from his accountants -this would create unfair prejudice against the prosecution b/c if the jury heard that he had paid what he owed, then they might not see what the problem is U.S. v. McRae (5th Cir. 1979) -pg. 10 -ct stated that evidence is excluded for prejudice when it is unfair prejudice that substantially outweighs the evidence’s probative value -ct also stated that 403 should only be used when the evidence was brought in specifically to create prejudice -ct found that rebuttal evidence allowed when emphasizes a certain defense - said that the shooting was an accident -one 403 issue – unfair prejudice with regard to the photographs -the judge didn’t let in every photograph; they just left in enough to tell the story -there was evidence that had been cheating on his wife, and claimed that this subjected him to unfair prejudice -this doesn’t have much probative value, but had presented evidence that he was so upset about the “accidental” death of his wife, which opened the door for the prosecution to rebut that evidence; if he hadn’t done this, then the evidence probably wouldn’t have been allowed due to its weak relevancy -401-403 – basic relevancy rules -404-415 – special relevancy rules -theoretically, we could get by without these rules -most of them are rules that restrict admissibility of relevant evidence; some are rules that declare admissibility -where the rule permits admissibility, you default to 403 -404(a) – the propensity rule; demonstrated by Gilliland -prosecution, in its case in chief, can’t offer evidence of character that the has committed other crimes
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas.

Page1 / 33

Evidence-Wellborn SU2008 Case Briefs - U.S v Johnson(5th...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online