🦅
Federal Evidence • Character Evidence
EVID#076
Legal Definition
If the defendant first offers evidence of the victim's violent character (by reputation, opinion, or specific acts), the prosecution can offer evidence of the defendant's character for violence (by reputation, opinion, or specific acts), or of the victim's character for peacefulness (by reputation, opinion, or specific acts).
Plain English Explanation
This is basically the same rule you learned in EVID#074, however, California is a bit more expansive. Under the Federal rules, character evidence offered against the victim would be limited to opinion or reputation, but California additionally allows specific acts.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1 (Reputation): In a trial where Bob is accused of assaulting Sam, Bob's defense team argues that Sam has a reputation in their community for being aggressive and starting fights. Result: To counter this claim about Sam's reputation, the prosecution may choose to introduce evidence about Bob's own reputation for being violent. Alternatively, they could present evidence showing that Sam actually has a reputation for being peaceful, countering the defense's portrayal.
Hypo 2 (Opinion): During Bob's trial for a fight with Sam, a witness for Bob testifies that, in their opinion, Sam is known to be a violent and aggressive person. Result: The prosecution can respond by bringing in witnesses who will testify, based on their opinion, that Bob is actually the one known for violent behavior. Alternatively, they could present witnesses who have the opinion that Sam is a generally peaceful person.
Hypo 3 (Specific Acts): Bob is on trial for an altercation with Sam. Bob's defense introduces evidence of a past incident where Sam started a fight in a bar, showcasing a specific act of violence. Result: The prosecution could counter by introducing specific instances where Bob exhibited violent behavior in the past. Alternatively, they could present evidence of specific acts that demonstrate Sam's peaceful nature, like instances where Sam de-escalated potentially violent situations.
PLEASE NOTE: You aren't limited to responding to the same type of character evidence like in the hypos above. It was illustrated that way for simplicity, but if the defendant offered Reputation evidence against a victim, the victim doesn't have to respond with Reputation evidence against the defendant.
Hypo 2 (Opinion): During Bob's trial for a fight with Sam, a witness for Bob testifies that, in their opinion, Sam is known to be a violent and aggressive person. Result: The prosecution can respond by bringing in witnesses who will testify, based on their opinion, that Bob is actually the one known for violent behavior. Alternatively, they could present witnesses who have the opinion that Sam is a generally peaceful person.
Hypo 3 (Specific Acts): Bob is on trial for an altercation with Sam. Bob's defense introduces evidence of a past incident where Sam started a fight in a bar, showcasing a specific act of violence. Result: The prosecution could counter by introducing specific instances where Bob exhibited violent behavior in the past. Alternatively, they could present evidence of specific acts that demonstrate Sam's peaceful nature, like instances where Sam de-escalated potentially violent situations.
PLEASE NOTE: You aren't limited to responding to the same type of character evidence like in the hypos above. It was illustrated that way for simplicity, but if the defendant offered Reputation evidence against a victim, the victim doesn't have to respond with Reputation evidence against the defendant.
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, 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 character evidence admissible in homicide cases involving self defense? What kinds are admissible?
When is evidence of prior sexual assault or child molestation admissible?
