🦅
Federal Evidence • Character Evidence
EVID#070
Legal Definition
In a homicide case where the defendant claims self defense, the prosecution may introduce evidence of the victim's peaceful nature (by reputation or opinion) to rebut the defendant's evidence that the victim was the aggressor.
On cross-examination, the defendant can generally only offer reputation or opinion as evidence, however, specific acts are admissible if it if character is an essential element of the of the defense.
On cross-examination, the defendant can generally only offer reputation or opinion as evidence, however, specific acts are admissible if it if character is an essential element of the of the defense.
Plain English Explanation
When someone is on trial for murder and claims they had to defend themselves, the law allows certain types of evidence to be used. Typically, evidence about a person's character, like whether they are violent or peaceful, isn't allowed in court because it can be misleading. However, in self-defense cases, this changes. Here, the prosecution (the side trying to prove the person is guilty) can bring in evidence to show the victim was peaceful. This is usually done through what people think of the victim (their opinion) or the victim's general reputation for being peaceful. The idea is to challenge the accused person's claim of self-defense by suggesting the victim was unlikely to have been the aggressor.
On the other hand, the person accused of murder (the defendant) can also use character evidence. They can bring in people's opinions or general beliefs about the victim to suggest they were violent or aggressive. Moreover, they can even point to specific things the victim did in the past that show a tendency towards violence. This helps the defendant build a case that their claim of self-defense was justified because the victim was likely to have been the aggressor.
On the other hand, the person accused of murder (the defendant) can also use character evidence. They can bring in people's opinions or general beliefs about the victim to suggest they were violent or aggressive. Moreover, they can even point to specific things the victim did in the past that show a tendency towards violence. This helps the defendant build a case that their claim of self-defense was justified because the victim was likely to have been the aggressor.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1: In Bob's trial for Sam's murder, Bob's lawyer brings in witnesses who say that Sam had a reputation for getting into fights and being aggressive. They also bring up a specific incident where Sam was involved in a violent altercation at a bar. Result: Bob's defense uses this character evidence to support his claim of self-defense, suggesting Sam could have been the aggressor.
Hypo 2: Bob is on trial for killing Sam. Bob claims he acted in self-defense because Sam attacked him first. The prosecution, to counter Bob's claim, brings in witnesses who testify that Sam was known in his community for being a peaceful, non-violent person. Result: The prosecution's evidence is admissible to challenge Bob's self-defense claim by suggesting Sam was unlikely to start a fight.
Hypo 2: Bob is on trial for killing Sam. Bob claims he acted in self-defense because Sam attacked him first. The prosecution, to counter Bob's claim, brings in witnesses who testify that Sam was known in his community for being a peaceful, non-violent person. Result: The prosecution's evidence is admissible to challenge Bob's self-defense claim by suggesting Sam was unlikely to start a fight.
Visual Aids
Related Concepts
How do California's rules differ from the Federal rules when it comes to introducing character evidence in a case involving sexual assault or child molestation?
How is the process of offering character evidence generally handled in California?
How is the process of offering character evidence generally handled under the Federal rules?
If the defendant offers evidence of a victim's bad character, what can the prosecution offer to rebut?
In California, if the defendant offers evidence of a victim's violent character, what can the prosecution offer to rebut?
In California, when can prior acts of domestic violence or elder abuse be admissible?
In cases involving sexual assault, when may a defendant introduce specific act evidence?
What are habit and custom evidence?
What is character evidence?
When assessing character evidence, what are non-character purposes?
When is character evidence admissible in civil cases?
When is character evidence admissible in criminal cases?
When is evidence of prior sexual assault or child molestation admissible?
