From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Diggs v. Lyons

U.S.
Apr 29, 1985
471 U.S. 1078 (1985)

Opinion

No. 84-5814.

April 29, 1985, October TERM, 1984.


C.A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 741 F. 2d 577.


Petitioner sued respondent prison officials in Federal District Court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging the use of excessive force in preventing his escape from Holmesburg County Prison in Philadelphia and the denial of access to legal assistance. Respondents prevailed on both claims. At trial, the District Court permitted respondents' counsel to prove that petitioner had been convicted of murder, bank robbery, attempted prison escape, and criminal conspiracy within the 10 years preceding the date of trial. In so doing the trial judge relied on Rule 609(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which provides that evidence of such felony convictions "shall be admitted" to attack the credibility "of a witness," if "the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to the defendant." The trial judge interpreted the Rule to require the evidence to be admitted since the Rule's provision for assessing the prejudicial import of the evidence applied only in regard to the defendant, not to a plaintiff witness against whom such evidence was sought to be introduced. Moreover, under the trial judge's view, Rule 609(a) precluded any resort to the balancing test of Rule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which permits the exclusion of relevant evidence if its probative value is "substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice."

Rule 609(a) provides:
"(a) General rule. — For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that he has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from him or established by public record during cross-examination but only if the crime (1) was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year under the law under which he was convicted, and the court determines that the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to the defendant, or (2) involved dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the punishment."
Rule 609(b) limits application of the Rule to convictions that are less than 10 years old.

Rule 403 provides:
"Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence."


Summaries of

Diggs v. Lyons

U.S.
Apr 29, 1985
471 U.S. 1078 (1985)
Case details for

Diggs v. Lyons

Case Details

Full title:DIGGS v. LYONS ET AL

Court:U.S.

Date published: Apr 29, 1985

Citations

471 U.S. 1078 (1985)

Citing Cases

Trindle v. Sonat Marine Inc.

In reaching that decision, I determined that the ten year time period of Rule 609 should conclude at the time…

Donald v. Wilson

Upon reviewing the authorities on both sides of this issue, we conclude that in civil cases when evidence of…