Move Signature Service Evidence with airSlate SignNow

Move signature service evidence

module three permitted uses of character evidence you in this module we investigate the subtleties of rule 404 uncharacteristic Stanly inadmissible rule 404 subsections tool in e 8 cases in which character evidence is admissible afterwards we'll discuss the proper procedure for proving character evidence in court when allowed finally we'll evaluate the limitations of relevance and discuss when otherwise relevant evidence is barred character evidence exceptions in criminal cases Federal Rule 404 - allows a defendant in a criminal case to introduce evidence of his own pertinent character traits which allows criminal defendants to bring witnesses as to good character a pertinent character trait is a characteristic that relates either to the crime or a defense to the crime for example in a fraud case the criminal defendant may call a witnesses testified that he's an honest person in a trial for a violent crime such as homicide battery or assault he may bring witnesses to testify that he's a peaceful person note though that the character evidence still must be relevant in United States versus Nevada Ramirez a police officer was charged with gun and drug possession during her defense she sought to introduce her Police Department performance evaluations to show her general competence at her job as a police officer the court did not allow this character evidence to be admitted reasoning that the character trait wasn't pertinent to the drug and gun possession crimes with which she was charged trial courts also retain power to limit the scope of proof by limiting the number of witnesses who can testify or the way proof of character is adduced once the defendant introduces evidence of a good character trait the government may introduce pertinent character evidence to rebut the defendants character evidence the defendants raising character evidence is thus sometimes referred to as opening the door to the use of character evidence against him as justice Robert H Jackson wrote in the seminal Supreme Court decision Mickelson versus United States the price a defendant must pay for attempting to prove his good name is to throw open the entire subject which the law has kept close for his benefit and to make himself vulnerable where the law otherwise shields him if a defendant does not open the door by making character an issue the government cannot bring up the character evidence for example in United States versus Tran Tran Quang wherein the defendant was charged with illegally prescribing drugs the federal prosecutor asked one of the doctors patients is it fair to say that the defendant had a reputation in the community for being an easy source of drugs because the defendant had never introduced character evidence regarding his reputation the appellate court held that the witness's testimony violated rule 404 and the question was improper rule 404 a to also permits the criminal defendant to introduce evidence of a pertinent character trait of the victim this exception allows defendants in homicide or assault cases to show the...