Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Seems to fall under 404b wigmores doctrine of chancesa

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: lestation, and cruelty to children. Smith and son lived with the victim, her brother and her mother. Outside presence of jury, Smith proffered the testimony of ten witnesses, including himself, regarding alleged past false accusations by the victim of sexual misconduct by men other than the d. Court did not admit the evidence because it found that the rape-shield law barred its admission. Court did allow testimony from several defense witnesses re: victim's reputation for poor truthfulness. Smith contends that the rape-shield law does not prohibit evidence that the victim had lied about sexual misconduct by men other than him, and that if it is so construed the law is unconstitutional as violating his right of confrontation. Issue: Does the rape-shield law prohibit evidence that the victim had previously lied about sexual misconduct by other men than the accused? If these acts are not prohibited, may they be proved by extrinsic evidence? Holding: The rape-shield law does not prohibit evidence that the victim had previously lied about sexual misconduct by men other than the accused? o Rape-shi...
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