Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

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: The issue wasn't whether Margie had the propensity to lie! Issue was whether Margie knew enough about Aetna's reporting requirements to know if what she was writing is false. o Was not closely related...probably would have been admissible if it was an instance where Margie had previously been charged with violating Aetna's reporting requirements. Notes: Preparation, plan. The charged act and the uncharged act have some interdependent relationship, the one is necessary to the other and there is some contingency relationship between them specifically. See Note 1, page 44 Knowledge = fairly closely related to intent. "I didn't know that was cocaine...I thought it was confectioner's sugar." Can bring in evidence that he had previously sold cocaine (thereby it is likely that he has knowledge of what cocaine is.) WHITTY v. STATE [Evidence Concerning the Accused in a Criminal Case: Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts Admissible for a Non-Character Purpose: Other Acts admitted to prove IDENTITY FRE 404(b)] Facts: Whitty approaches a group of children, tells a girl that he's lost his black and white rabbit and asks her to help him find it They...
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