Jan
28
If a criminal defendant takes the stand on her own behalf, which of the following convictions is inadmissible to impeach her credibility even though the trial judge believes that the probative value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect?
A. A conviction more than fifteen years old where the prosecution has notified the defendant of its intention to introduce the conviction.
B. A conviction which is under appeal.
C. A conviction for arson less than ten years old.
D. A juvenile conviction.
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Answer D is correct. Federal Rule 609(d) renders inadmissible evidence of the criminal defendant’s juvenile adjudications or crimes under any circumstances, even if the judge finds that their probative value exceeds the prejudicial effect.
Answer A is incorrect. The judge has discretion to allow evidence of convictions of crimes which are more than ten years old under Federal Rule 609(b) if the court determines that the probative value of the conviction substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect, and the adverse party has been properly notified.
Answer B is incorrect. Federal Rule 609(e) specifically provides that convictions which are admissible will not be rendered inadmissible by the fact that they are being appealed. The Rule permits evidence of the pendency of the appeal.
Answer C is incorrect. Under Federal Rule 609(a), the trial judge has discretion to allow evidence of convictions for crimes other than those involving dishonesty which are less than ten years old, providing the judge finds that the probative value of admitting the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect on the defendant.
D. juvenile delinquency cases, or pardons and annulments based on innocence or rehabilitation, are normally not available for impeachment.
B — cannot use juvenile convictions.
D is the best answer. A juvenile conviction cannot be used to impeach a defendant.
agree with everybody.
Cannot use juvenile conviction against the accused, but could use it against the non-accused if necessary for fairness. D.
The Answer is D. You cannot use a juvenile conviction against the accused.
I believe the best answer is D.
I’m totally guessing right now, but I believe it’s D. I don’t think you can use a juvenile conviction no matter the potential probative value.
D is correct–FRE 609(d) Juvenile conviction is generally inadmissible but court has discretion in criminal case for witness OTHER THAN ACCUSED, if necessary for fairness. Here, since the juvenile conviction relates to the accused, it is inadmissible notwithstanding the judge’s belief that the probative value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect.