U.S. v. Jackson case brief
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
405 F. Supp. 938
CASE SYNOPSIS: Defendant, accused of
robbing a bank at gunpoint, filed pretrial motions to exclude a
recent state felony conviction for assault and evidence that he used
a false name on being arrested in Georgia shortly after the
robbery.
FACTS: Defendant contended that admission of the contested evidence would unduly prejudice him. In conditionally granting the motions, the court held that the recent state felony conviction for assault could not be used to impeach defendant in the event that he took the stand.
ANALYSIS:
The evidence was not admissible under Fed. R. Evid. 609(a) because prior assaultive conduct had little bearing on the likelihood that defendant would tell the truth. At the same time, the knowledge that defendant was a recently convicted felon might have an unduly significant impact on the jury's determination of whether defendant committed armed bank robbery. Exclusion of the evidence was conditioned on defendant refraining from suggesting a pristine background on direct and defendant not present evidence of any assault convictions of any government witnesses. Evidence of defendant's presence in Georgia and use of a false name was inadmissible under Fed. R. Evid. 403 because its probative value was outweighed by possible prejudice.
CONCLUSION: The court conditionally granted the motions.
FACTS: Defendant contended that admission of the contested evidence would unduly prejudice him. In conditionally granting the motions, the court held that the recent state felony conviction for assault could not be used to impeach defendant in the event that he took the stand.
ANALYSIS:
The evidence was not admissible under Fed. R. Evid. 609(a) because prior assaultive conduct had little bearing on the likelihood that defendant would tell the truth. At the same time, the knowledge that defendant was a recently convicted felon might have an unduly significant impact on the jury's determination of whether defendant committed armed bank robbery. Exclusion of the evidence was conditioned on defendant refraining from suggesting a pristine background on direct and defendant not present evidence of any assault convictions of any government witnesses. Evidence of defendant's presence in Georgia and use of a false name was inadmissible under Fed. R. Evid. 403 because its probative value was outweighed by possible prejudice.
CONCLUSION: The court conditionally granted the motions.
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment