New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

9/26 - 9/28

by: Elizabeth

9/26 - 9/28

Marketplace > Suffolk University > Law > > 9 26 9 28
Suffolk University

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

Federal Rules of Evidence 403, 413, 414, 415
Class Notes
25 ?




Popular in Evidence

Popular in Law

This 4 page Class Notes was uploaded by Elizabeth on Friday September 30, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to at Suffolk University taught by Cavallaro in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 3 views. For similar materials see Evidence in Law at Suffolk University.


Reviews for 9/26 - 9/28


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 09/30/16
September 26, 2016 Proof of Modus Operandi P181 United States v. Stevens  D said another robbery happened and it was exactly the same as this one and that supports that the defendant should be excluded because he didn’t commit that robbery  The d cant use character / trait therefore  The other robber (other act) cant be used to show that the d is/ is not the kind of person who is a robber (trait) to show that he is guilty of this crime (This robbery)  Instead use signature or identity  D just has to raise a reasonable doubt and show that there are similarities between the two robberies o Both used military ID o Checks o Both showed up on or near a military base  403 Prejudice against the d but the d is the proponent offering evidence against the government  what about unfair prejudice against the government? They have all the cards, this information invites reasonable doubt and it is not that unfair then not as similar doesn’t matter  balance the equation #3.9 Misreading Stevens - straight propensity = character theory 4. Narrative Integrity / Non propensity theory #3.10 Russian Roulette - The Russian roulette game cant be used to prove that he is the kind of person who is a gun user, a psycho, a monster (trait) in order to show that he is guilty of owning this gun - But you could use narrative integrity, the victim should be able to narrate this story to show how she knows that the gun is his, because she was a part of this russian roulette game and it really scared her so she would never forget the gun that was used - Gov: the purposes of the narrative is to identify the gun, the RR episode is engraved in her memory because it was a scary moment, she’ll never forget - Creates credibility of the circumstances why she would never forget - How probative 403 versus unfair prejudice (substantially outweighs the need for narrative integrity?) 5. Absence of Accident / Lack of Accident #3.11 Cleaning His Gun - D claimed he was cleaning his gun when he shot Wife #1 Accident (other act ) cant be used to show that he is a wife murderer (trait) to prove that he is guilty of killing Wife #2 (this act) when cleaning his gun - But you could argue Absence of Accident o If this was accidental, would you be super careful in cleaning a gun or extremely unlikely you would clean your gun in front of anyone #3.12 Cruelty to dogs - This act d prosecuted for road rage, threw dog into road and said dog bit me as defense to the accident - however the prior act was not an accident when he beat a dog and killed the dog purposefully - since the first act was not an accident it is a character trait, he is the kind of person who kills dogs 6. Doctrine of Chance The Huddleston Standard Huddleston v. United States  ex: tranqler case (2 bombs in different states) o assume no prosecution on Quincy bomb but want to prosecute Rosendale bomb, the same person built the bombs, but we don’t know how o Conditional Relevance  IF Tranqler built the Quincy bomb THEN Tranqler built the Rosendale bomb o FIRST you have to prove that Tranqler built the FIRST bomb o 404(b) is a 104(b) o FIRST SATISFY 104(b) because 404(b) is CONDITIONAL RELEVANCE p.206 GUIDE 1) What is the none propensity theory? 404(b) 2) How do we know the defendant preformed the conditional evidence? The Huddleston Question 104(b) 3) How probative versus unfair prejudice is it on 404(b) evidence (eg motive) 403 September 28, 2016 404 REVIEW 1) What is the none propensity theory? a. Motive, intent, knowledge, identity, lack of accident  important other acts b. 404(b) 2) how do we know the defendant preformed the conditional evidence? a. Huddleston b. 104(b) 3) how probative is the 404(b) evidence versus unfair prejudice? a. 403 b. what kind? Usually the other act is not yet proven (104 (b) ) - evidence sufficient to support a finding that this person did the other act - find to a preponderance (more probable than not, then you may consider that as evidence) pg. 205 FN 6 403 – Factors for weighing unfair prejudice - risk of confusing the jury - weakness of the evidence - risk that the jury will find for propensity (prohibited character trait) and will be prejudicial towards the defendant #3.13 Past Acquittal 2. if that other act ended in an acquittal and it was beyond a reasonable doubt - what happens in this case? If it is just preponderance of the evidence - you could still find for a preponderance because it is a lower standard that beyond a reasonable doubt Burden of Proof - other act BRD is a higher standard than this trial which is a lower standard with a preponderance of the evidence - just because we couldn’t convict to BRD doesn’t mean whether or not we could get to a preponderance - prior acquittal doesn’t mean we cant try for 404(b) We can overlay Burdens of Proof Propensity evidence in sexual assault FRE 413, 414, 415 : YOU CAN GO THROUGH PROPENSITY YOU CAN USE CHARACTER TRAITS FRE 413: Criminal charge on sexual assault FRE 414: Criminal charge on child sexual assault FRE 415: Civil charge with underlying sexual or child sexual assault FRE 413 Sexual Assault  criminal case the d is accused of SA – court may admit evidence that the d committed ANY OTHER SA o Other crime is SA - - - - - Character trait - - - - to prove this SA crime  Considered on ANY matter of relevance 401 P220 Push out of character into “Mental Disease” Compelling public interest, substantial corroboration, illumine the credibility Just because he SA other child does that mean he SA this child? BEFORE 413 & 414 p. 208 Lannan v. State Child molestation is different than 404 of character because defendant cant stop thesmevlves. Instead of 413 and 414 there was 1) Recidivist Rational a. Child sex is more likely to always want child sex b. Falls upon scrutiny because that’s the same with drugs? Its also recidivist c. This is sickness / predictiveness is not persuasive 2) Bolstering the testimony of the victim State v. Kirsch  Motive / intent / common plan / scheme are used to let in other victims’ testimonies Prosecutor must left defendant know at least 15 days before trial that they are using 413 Don’t need step (1) propensity theory because 413 Steps (2) 104(b) conditional evidence and step (3) 403 risk of using for propensity danger? Cant be because propensity is the probativeness so the 403 risk / factors could be , the strength of the evidence, wasting time, confusing the jury / misleading p. 266 United States v. Guardia  Gynecologist touching beyond professionally appropriate?


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

25 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."

Allison Fischer University of Alabama

"I signed up to be an Elite Notetaker with 2 of my sorority sisters this semester. We just posted our notes weekly and were each making over $600 per month. I LOVE StudySoup!"

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."


"Their 'Elite Notetakers' are making over $1,200/month in sales by creating high quality content that helps their classmates in a time of need."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.