Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Issue is evidence of his uncharged sexual offense

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: commit the offense. Sounds a hell of a lot similar to propensity, he has the propensity to commit the offense because he's done it before. o New trial demanded. Second trial - Government argued that the evidence was admissible under FRE 414. o District court excluded the evidence under Rule 403. Issue: Government now appeals the second trial - claiming that the probative value of the evidence (under 414) is not outweighed by unfair prejudice. Is evidence of his uncharged sexual offense against his other niece admissible under Rule 414? o Note: There is 8 to 10 years between the two sexual offenses Holding: Evidence was admissible under Rule 414. The sort of generic prejudice that exists when you show a previous sex offense can't be enough to exclude it (because thereby the balancing test would always fail with respect to sex offenses). o Danger of unfair prejudice noted by the District Court was that presented by the "unique stigma" of child sexual abuse. Precisely such holdings that Congress intended to overrule in creation of Rule 414....
View Full 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 at Austin.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online