09-2880 U.S. v. Courtright

Listen to this article

Evidence
Prior sexual assaults

Evidence of a prior sexual assault is not admissible under Rule 413, when the defendant is charged not with a new sexual assault, but child pornography offenses.

“In admitting the evidence, the district court interpreted the word ‘accused’ broadly, holding that Rule 413 is triggered when a defendant has been verbally accused of sexual assault during the course of an investigation into a separate offense. Courtright takes issue with this interpretation of Rule 413, arguing that Rule 413 applies only when a party has been charged with an ‘offense of sexual assault’ in the indictment.”

“We do not agree with the district court’s reading of Rule 413. The district court’s interpretation was based on the fact that Rule 413 uses the word ‘accused’ instead of ‘charged’ to indicate when it is triggered. The government defends the district court’s reading by noting that, because the rule drafters use the word ‘charged’ elsewhere, the use of the word ‘accused’ in this instance should be given broader effect. We believe the government makes too much of this distinction-at the time Rule 413 was drafted (and today), the word ‘accused’ was often used in a technical sense to describe someone who was charged with a crime. See Black’s Law Dictionary 22-23 (6th ed. 1990) (defining ‘accuse’ as ‘to bring a formal charge against a person’); Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 14 (1986) (defining ‘accuse’ as, among other things, ‘to charge with an offense judicially or by public process’). There is nothing in the text or committee notes of Rule 413 to indicate that the word ‘accused’ was used in a broader fashion.”

Affirmed.

09-2880 U.S. v. Courtright

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, Herndon, J., Kanne, J.

Full Text