Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Issue is the yohe evidence admissible under 404b

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: etre pleaded not guilty. Van Metre filed a motion in limine to exclude evidence that 11 days prior to the event he had been convicted of kidnapping and sexually assaulting another woman (Yohe). District Court concluded that the previous conviction was admissible under Rule 404(b) for the limited purpose of showing Van Metre's intent. Is the Yohe evidence admissible under 404(b)? Holding: Yes: "We conclude that Yohe's testimony that Van Metre raped her was relevant to show that Van Metre had the specific intent to sexually assault Blake." Notes: Other purposes Intent. If there is an intent exception, since intent is a requirement of most crimes, isn't there a danger that the exception will swallow the rule? It doesn't and we need to understand how it doesn't swallow the rule! Example of when it is okay to bring in other act evidence for intent: Beecham charged with stealing silver dollar he was supposed to be carrying in mail, evidence that in his house he had envelopes and packages that w...
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.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online