Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

On appeal carino argues that it was error for the

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: things: o Carino says Richardson attacked him and he acted in self defense o Richardson says Carino attacked her out of nowhere and when she tried to seek cover he shot her. Procedural Posture: At trial Carino testified that Richardson threatened him saying she was going to kill him and that he was "going to be the second man she killed because she had killed a man." Court instructed Carino not to refer in any way to the prior crime or Richardson's conviction of voluntary manslaughter. On appeal, Carino argues that it was error for the district court to have excluded Richardon's conviction. Issue: Was evidence of Richardon's [the victim's] past manslaughter conviction admissible? Holding: Evidence of this previous conviction would normally be admissible to prove that Carino reasonably feared for his life, but in this case it wasn't reversible error b/c he was able to get that message across through other evidence and his evidence that he acted in self-defense is very weak. o Would normally be admissible under 404(b) Although there is no specific reference in the FRE to adm...
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