Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Thus there is no inherent error in admitting under

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: objectives; rather, courts determine only whether Congress' judgment was rational." District court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the evidence. o There is no evidence that the prior conviction presented any danger of unfair prejudice beyond that which "all propensity evidence in such trial presents" but is now allowed by Rule 413,: Was Congress' intent that the new rules superseded in sex offense cases the restrictive aspects of FRE 404(b). Thus, there is no inherent error in admitting under Rule 413 evidence that would be inadmissible under Rule 404(b); that is the rule's intended effect. Notes: If you have a specific justification for singling out sex offenses than it should be okay to make this rule! RATIONAL RELATION TO SOME LEGITIMATE END this law just needs to have some rational relation to a legitimate end. Sex offenses = o Likely to always fail Rule 403 balancing test without a special rule Compelling reasons to allow evidence of a prior offense: o Hard to prove w/o other...
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