Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

The only thing they didnt allow was for him

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: otomy, either habit or character! But sometimes it is neither! United States v. Levin cited in Weil v. Seitzer o Levin was an orthodox Jew observed the Sabbath, Friday evening Saturday evening Was either home or at services...only walking o Charged with some sort of criminal fraud, part of which happened on the Sabbath o Sabbath is his alibi cited as an example of not habit, does have to make a conscious decision habit needs to be things that you do without thinking...but this isn't CHARACTER evidence either...he's not making the argument "because I observe my religion, therefore I am of good character and therefore I wouldn't commit this crime." It's alibi!!! (And in fact, in Levin they allowed him to show evidence of his observant practice of his, because it is alibi! The only thing they didn't allow was for him additionally to put on a rabbi as an expert witness, but that was a sound ruling..enough is enough! Has nothing to do with distinction between habit and character) Levin has been misinterpreted this dichotomy between habit and character shouldn't exist! There are other types of evidence! In Weil v. Seitzer, Court says this evidence might be admissible under another theory but you only off...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online