Character Evidence - Revision history

Ibjadmin at 22:50, 10 December 2010

2010-12-10T22:50:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:50, 11 December 2010
Line 17:		Line 17:
	Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404 "Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion."<ref>Federal Rule of Evidence 404</ref> Such evidence may be offered for several other reasons:to prove motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, identity, absence of mistake or accident.		Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404 "Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion."<ref>Federal Rule of Evidence 404</ref> Such evidence may be offered for several other reasons:to prove motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, identity, absence of mistake or accident.

	==The Exceptions==		===The Exceptions===
	Although character evidence and similar crimes evidence is generally inadmissible, a number of exceptions have been recognized over the years. These were later codified in section B of rule 404.		Although character evidence and similar crimes evidence is generally inadmissible, a number of exceptions have been recognized over the years. These were later codified in section B of rule 404.

	Evidence offered under one of these exceptions must still be analyzed to determine whether the probative value outweights the prejudicial effect of the evidence. [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time \| Rule 403]]. Because a genuine issue can usually not be identified until after the defense presented its case, 404(b) evidence is typically offered in rebuttal.		Evidence offered under one of these exceptions must still be analyzed to determine whether the probative value outweights the prejudicial effect of the evidence. [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time \| Rule 403]]. Because a genuine issue can usually not be identified until after the defense presented its case, 404(b) evidence is typically offered in rebuttal.


	Evidence of bad acts are only relevant if they actually occurred. In Huddelsteon v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that in order for character evidence to be admissible at trial, a judge must make a preliminary determination that there is		Evidence of bad acts are only relevant if they actually occurred. In Huddelsteon v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that in order for character evidence to be admissible at trial, a judge must make a preliminary determination that there is
Line 29:		Line 28:
	# that act occurred<ref>Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988)</ref>		# that act occurred<ref>Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988)</ref>

	== Character Evidence Flow Chart for US Federal Courts ==		=== Character Evidence Flow Chart for US Federal Courts ===
	[[File:characterevidenceflowchart.jpg]]		[[File:characterevidenceflowchart.jpg]]

Ibjadmin: /* Special Rules for Sex Cases */

2010-12-10T22:49:59Z

Special Rules for Sex Cases

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:49, 11 December 2010
Line 16:		Line 16:

	Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404 "Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion."<ref>Federal Rule of Evidence 404</ref> Such evidence may be offered for several other reasons:to prove motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, identity, absence of mistake or accident.		Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404 "Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion."<ref>Federal Rule of Evidence 404</ref> Such evidence may be offered for several other reasons:to prove motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, identity, absence of mistake or accident.

	~~===Special Rules for Sex Cases===~~

	==The Exceptions==		==The Exceptions==

Ibjadmin: /* Special Rules for Sex Cases */

2010-12-10T22:49:48Z

Special Rules for Sex Cases

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:49, 11 December 2010
Line 18:		Line 18:

	===Special Rules for Sex Cases===		===Special Rules for Sex Cases===

	(2) Character of alleged victim - In a criminal case, and subject to the limitations imposed by [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 412. Sex Offense Cases; Relevance of Alleged Victim's Past Sexual Behavior or Alleged Sexual Predisposition \| Rule 412]], evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the alleged victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the alleged victim was the first aggressor;

	(3) Character of witness - Evidence of the character of a witness, as provided in [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 607. Who May Impeach \| Rule 607]], [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 608. Evidence of Character and Conduct of Witness \| Rule 608]], and [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 609. Impeachment by Evidence of Conviction of Crime \| Rule 609]].

	~~(b) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts~~

	Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, provided that upon request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall provide reasonable notice in advance of trial, or during trial if the court excuses pretrial notice on good cause shown, of the general nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial.

	==The Exceptions==		==The Exceptions==

Ibjadmin: /* Background */

2010-12-10T22:49:18Z

Background

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:49, 11 December 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	=Background=		=Background=
	Character evidence is a fertile area for both prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys. Character evidence is sometimes also called "propensity evidence." The danger of character evidence is well known as factfinders often overvalue character evidence during their deliberations. As a result, in the United States, the admissibility of character evidence is subject to a complex web of common law and statutory rules intended to decrease the prejudicial impact of this kind of evidence.		Character evidence is a fertile area for both prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys. Character evidence is sometimes also called "propensity evidence." The danger of character evidence is well known as factfinders often overvalue character evidence during their deliberations. As a result, in the United States, the admissibility of character evidence is subject to a complex web of common law and statutory rules intended to decrease the prejudicial impact of this kind of evidence.

			The danger of character evidence is that the factfinder will convict the defendant because they are a "bad person" or that they have committed similar crimes in the past rather than focusing on the prosecution's burden to prove the case against the defendant.

	Character evidence takes several forms.		Character evidence takes several forms.
Line 8:		Line 10:
	* Opinion Evidence		* Opinion Evidence

			A criminal defense lawyer should always remember that evidence of bad acts are only relevant if they actually occurred.<ref>Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988)</ref>
	A criminal defense lawyer should always remember that evidence of bad acts are only relevant if they actually occurred. ~~In Huddelsteon v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that in order for character evidence to be admissible at trial, a judge must make a preliminary determination that there is~~
	~~# Sufficient admissible evidence~~
	~~# for a reasonable jury~~
	~~# to conclude by a preponderance (rather than beyond a reasonable doubt or clear and convincing standards)~~
	~~# that act occurred~~<ref>Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988)</ref>

	=Country Specific Applications=		=Country Specific Applications=

Ibjadmin: /* Background */

2010-12-10T22:47:24Z

Background

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:47, 11 December 2010
Line 2:		Line 2:
	Character evidence is a fertile area for both prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys. Character evidence is sometimes also called "propensity evidence." The danger of character evidence is well known as factfinders often overvalue character evidence during their deliberations. As a result, in the United States, the admissibility of character evidence is subject to a complex web of common law and statutory rules intended to decrease the prejudicial impact of this kind of evidence.		Character evidence is a fertile area for both prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys. Character evidence is sometimes also called "propensity evidence." The danger of character evidence is well known as factfinders often overvalue character evidence during their deliberations. As a result, in the United States, the admissibility of character evidence is subject to a complex web of common law and statutory rules intended to decrease the prejudicial impact of this kind of evidence.

			Character evidence takes several forms.
			* Prior Bad Acts
			* Prior Criminal Convictions
			* Reputation Evidence
			* Opinion Evidence


			A criminal defense lawyer should always remember that evidence of bad acts are only relevant if they actually occurred. In Huddelsteon v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that in order for character evidence to be admissible at trial, a judge must make a preliminary determination that there is
			# Sufficient admissible evidence
			# for a reasonable jury
			# to conclude by a preponderance (rather than beyond a reasonable doubt or clear and convincing standards)
			# that act occurred<ref>Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988)</ref>

	=Country Specific Applications=		=Country Specific Applications=

Ibjadmin: /* Country Specific Applications */

2010-12-10T22:42:20Z

Country Specific Applications

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:42, 11 December 2010
Line 6:		Line 6:
	==United States==		==United States==

			Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404 "Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion."<ref>Federal Rule of Evidence 404</ref> Such evidence may be offered for several other reasons:to prove motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, identity, absence of mistake or accident.

	~~Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404 "Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible~~ for ~~the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion", except:~~		===Special Rules for Sex Cases===

	(1) Character of accused - In a criminal case, evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or if evidence of a trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime is offered by an accused and admitted under Rule 404 (a)(2), evidence of the same trait of character of the accused offered by the prosecution;

	(2) Character of alleged victim - In a criminal case, and subject to the limitations imposed by [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 412. Sex Offense Cases; Relevance of Alleged Victim's Past Sexual Behavior or Alleged Sexual Predisposition \| Rule 412]], evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the alleged victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the alleged victim was the first aggressor;		(2) Character of alleged victim - In a criminal case, and subject to the limitations imposed by [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 412. Sex Offense Cases; Relevance of Alleged Victim's Past Sexual Behavior or Alleged Sexual Predisposition \| Rule 412]], evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the alleged victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the alleged victim was the first aggressor;
Line 24:		Line 23:
	Evidence offered under one of these exceptions must still be analyzed to determine whether the probative value outweights the prejudicial effect of the evidence. [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time \| Rule 403]]. Because a genuine issue can usually not be identified until after the defense presented its case, 404(b) evidence is typically offered in rebuttal.		Evidence offered under one of these exceptions must still be analyzed to determine whether the probative value outweights the prejudicial effect of the evidence. [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time \| Rule 403]]. Because a genuine issue can usually not be identified until after the defense presented its case, 404(b) evidence is typically offered in rebuttal.

	~~===Motive===~~

	~~===Opportunity===~~

	~~===Intent===~~

	~~===Preparation===~~

	~~===Plan===~~

	~~===Identity===~~

	~~===Absence of Mistake of Accident===~~

	~~== Other Important Rules ==~~		Evidence of bad acts are only relevant if they actually occurred. In Huddelsteon v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that in order for character evidence to be admissible at trial, a judge must make a preliminary determination that there is
	* Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988). Evidence of bad acts is only relevant if it actually ~~occured. Before Huddeston, there was a split among the circuits as to what level of proof was required to make character evidence admissible at trial~~. In Huddelsteon v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that in order for character evidence to be admissible at trial, a judge must make a preliminary determination that there is
	# Sufficient admissible evidence		# Sufficient admissible evidence
	# for a reasonable jury		# for a reasonable jury
	# to conclude by a preponderance (rather than beyond a reasonable doubt or clear and convincing standards)		# to conclude by a preponderance (rather than beyond a reasonable doubt or clear and convincing standards)
	# that act ~~occured~~		# that act occurred<ref>Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988)</ref>

	== Character Evidence Flow Chart ==		== Character Evidence Flow Chart for US Federal Courts ==
	[[File:characterevidenceflowchart.jpg]]		[[File:characterevidenceflowchart.jpg]]

	----		----
	See [[Federal Rules of Evidence]]		See [[Federal Rules of Evidence]]
			=Notes=
			<references/>

Ibjadmin at 22:38, 10 December 2010

2010-12-10T22:38:18Z

New page

=Background=
Character evidence is a fertile area for both prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys. Character evidence is sometimes also called "propensity evidence." The danger of character evidence is well known as factfinders often overvalue character evidence during their deliberations. As a result, in the United States, the admissibility of character evidence is subject to a complex web of common law and statutory rules intended to decrease the prejudicial impact of this kind of evidence.

=Country Specific Applications=
==United States==

Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404 "Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion", except:

(1) Character of accused - In a criminal case, evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or if evidence of a trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime is offered by an accused and admitted under Rule 404 (a)(2), evidence of the same trait of character of the accused offered by the prosecution;

(2) Character of alleged victim - In a criminal case, and subject to the limitations imposed by [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 412. Sex Offense Cases; Relevance of Alleged Victim's Past Sexual Behavior or Alleged Sexual Predisposition | Rule 412]], evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the alleged victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the alleged victim was the first aggressor;

(3) Character of witness - Evidence of the character of a witness, as provided in [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 607. Who May Impeach | Rule 607]], [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 608. Evidence of Character and Conduct of Witness | Rule 608]], and [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 609. Impeachment by Evidence of Conviction of Crime | Rule 609]].

(b) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts

Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, provided that upon request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall provide reasonable notice in advance of trial, or during trial if the court excuses pretrial notice on good cause shown, of the general nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial.

==The Exceptions==
Although character evidence and similar crimes evidence is generally inadmissible, a number of exceptions have been recognized over the years. These were later codified in section B of rule 404.

Evidence offered under one of these exceptions must still be analyzed to determine whether the probative value outweights the prejudicial effect of the evidence. [[ Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time | Rule 403]]. Because a genuine issue can usually not be identified until after the defense presented its case, 404(b) evidence is typically offered in rebuttal.

===Motive===

===Opportunity===

===Intent===

===Preparation===

===Plan===

===Identity===

===Absence of Mistake of Accident===

== Other Important Rules ==
* Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988). Evidence of bad acts is only relevant if it actually occured. Before Huddeston, there was a split among the circuits as to what level of proof was required to make character evidence admissible at trial. In Huddelsteon v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that in order for character evidence to be admissible at trial, a judge must make a preliminary determination that there is
# Sufficient admissible evidence
# for a reasonable jury
# to conclude by a preponderance (rather than beyond a reasonable doubt or clear and convincing standards)
# that act occured

== Character Evidence Flow Chart ==
[[File:characterevidenceflowchart.jpg]]

----
See [[Federal Rules of Evidence]]