US v. Manske case brief

1. US v. Manske (7th Cir 1999)
1. three views of breadth of 608(b) – scope of nonconviction misconduct questioning:
• broad view: allows questioning on almost any misconduct.
• narrow view: confines questions to acts that are themselves false or misleading.
• middle view: reaches conduct “seeking personal advantage by taking from others in violation of their rights.”
2. cts applying FRE 608(b) have rejected broad view; generally allow questions that satisfy the narrow view by asking directly about deceptive statements or behavior.
• it’s cases like Manske, where conduct has a wrongful/exploitative aspect but isn’t false or deceptive in itself that courts come out either way.