For Your Data United States V. Sanders Illustration Brief
November 22, 2019
Edit
United States v. Sanders example brief summary
964 F.2d 295 (4th Cir. 1992)
CASE FACTS
Before dissimilar trials for onset amongst intent to commit murder in addition to shank possession, accused prison theater inmate filed motions inward limine to exclude evidence of prior onset in addition to contraband possession convictions. Defendant testified claiming self-defense, in addition to district courtroom allowed prosecution to cross-examine accused close prior convictions under Fed. R. Evid. (FRE) 609(a) & 404(b). Separate juries convicted accused of both charges. Following convictions, accused appealed.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
Because district courtroom erred admitting evidence of defendant's prior convictions for onset in addition to possession of a contraband shank in addition to such fault was prejudicial every bit to onset conviction, courtroom reversed onset conviction in addition to remanded for novel trial; courtroom affirmed defendant's contraband possession conviction because such fault was harmless every bit to it.
Suggested constabulary schoolhouse written report materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
964 F.2d 295 (4th Cir. 1992)
CASE SYNOPSIS
In defendant's lawsuit for onset amongst intent to commit murder in addition to knife or shank possession, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia allowed prosecution to acknowledge evidence of defendant's prior convictions for onset in addition to possession of contraband shank under Fed. R. Evid. 609(a) & 404(b); accused appealed.CASE FACTS
Before dissimilar trials for onset amongst intent to commit murder in addition to shank possession, accused prison theater inmate filed motions inward limine to exclude evidence of prior onset in addition to contraband possession convictions. Defendant testified claiming self-defense, in addition to district courtroom allowed prosecution to cross-examine accused close prior convictions under Fed. R. Evid. (FRE) 609(a) & 404(b). Separate juries convicted accused of both charges. Following convictions, accused appealed.
DISCUSSION
- With observe to defendant's onset conviction, courtroom institute reversible fault in addition to held defendant's prior convictions inadmissible under FRE 609(a) & 404(b) because such evidence had footling bearing on defendant's propensity to evidence truthfully, was extremely prejudicial since it involved exact type of deportment on trial, in addition to exemplified evidence proving exclusively criminal disposition.
- Thus, the courtroom could non nation amongst fair assurance that onset judgment was non substantially swayed past times erroneous admission of manifestly damaging evidence.
- The courtroom affirmed defendant's shank possession conviction because such fault was harmless.
CONCLUSION
Because district courtroom erred admitting evidence of defendant's prior convictions for onset in addition to possession of a contraband shank in addition to such fault was prejudicial every bit to onset conviction, courtroom reversed onset conviction in addition to remanded for novel trial; courtroom affirmed defendant's contraband possession conviction because such fault was harmless every bit to it.
Suggested constabulary schoolhouse written report materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.