The prosecutor was allowed to ask convicted of fraud on an earlier occasion). these questions only to test whether had a good basis for (name of witness) opinion of the character. This is not evidence that the (his)(her) defendant’s acts described in these questions actually occurred. You may not use the information developed by the prosecutor on this subject for any other purpose. Specifically, you may not use this information to conclude that the defendant committed the act(s) charged in the indictment or as proof that the defendant has a bad character or any propensity to commit crimes. Comment et al., supra, § 11.15, Sand et al., supra, 5-16, and Eighth Circuit § See O’Malley 2.10. This instruction should be included in the concluding instructions if the prosecutor was permitted to cross-examine the character witness concerning prior defendant’s instances of the conduct. Instruction 2.17 (Impeachment of defendant’s Defendant’s Character Witness) should be given to the jury at the time of the cross-examination. Under Rule 404(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, a defendant is permitted to introduce evidence of good character to support the inference that the defendant did not commit the offense charged. Instruction 4.39 Character Evidence) describes (Defendant’s the role of that evidence. Rule 405(a) permits the prosecutor to cross-examine the character witness concerning specific instances of the conduct defendant’s defendant’s relating to the character trait at issue. The rules thus continue the common law practice discussed in 335 U.S. 469 (1948), but with one difference: Michelson v. United States, opinion evidence, which was prohibited at common law, is allowed under the rules. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, the character witness may testify to either reputation or opinion. A reputation witness testifies to the reputation for a specific trait in a defendant’s specific community, based on conversations with others concerning the defendant. See
convicted of fraud on an earlier occasion). The prosecutor was allowed to ask these questions only to test whether (name of witness) had a good basis for (his)(her) opinion of the defendant’s character. This is not evidence that the acts described in these questions actually occurred. You may not use the information developed by the prosecutor on this subject for any other purpose. Specifically, you may not use this information to conclude that the defendant committed the act(s) charged in the indictment or as proof that the defendant has a bad character or any propensity to commit crimes. Comment See O’Malley et al., supra, § 11.15, Sand et al., supra, 5-16, and Eighth Circuit § 2.10. This instruction should be included in the concluding instructions if the prosecutor was permitted to cross-examine the defendant’s character witness concerning prior instances of the defendant’s conduct. Instruction 2.17 (Impeachment of Defendant’s Character Witness) should be given to the jury at the time of the cross-examination. Under Rule 404(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, a defendant is permitted to introduce evidence of good character to support the inference that the defendant did not commit the offense charged. Instruction 4.39 (Defendant’s Character Evidence) describes the role of that evidence. Rule 405(a) permits the prosecutor to cross-examine the defendant’s character witness concerning specific instances of the defendant’s conduct relating to the character trait at issue. The rules thus continue the common law practice discussed in Michelson v. United States, 335 U.S. 469 (1948), but with one difference: opinion evidence, which was prohibited at common law, is allowed under the rules. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, the character witness may testify to either reputation or opinion. A reputation witness testifies to the defendant’s reputation for a specific trait in a specific community, based on conversations with others concerning the defendant. See
2014%20Chapter%204%20final.docx