Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Evidence — other acts – prejudice — harmless error

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 30, 2012//

Evidence — other acts – prejudice — harmless error

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 30, 2012//

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Evidence — other acts – prejudice — harmless error

Although it was error to admit other acts evidence without considering whether it was unduly prejudicial, the error is harmless.

“Andrew Miller was charged with one count of distributing, one count of receiving, and three counts of possessing child pornography. At trial, Miller testified that he had no interest in viewing child pornography, and he did not ‘seek out images of naked children.’ Finding that Miller’s testimony opened the door to evidence of his intent, knowledge, and lack of mistake, the district court allowed the government to question him about allegations of sexual misconduct made by his six-year-old granddaughter and his teenage stepdaughter. The court prohibited the government from proving up these allegations with extrinsic evidence, however, and it instructed the jury at the close of the evidence that the evidence was relevant only to “the questions of [Miller’s] intent, knowledge, and lack of mistake.” The jury convicted Miller on all counts.”

“Miller appeals his conviction, arguing that the district court erred by allowing the government to question him about his granddaughter’s and stepdaughter’s allegations without conducting the requisite Rule 403 balancing test. He insists that the error prejudiced him because the government’s case would have been significantly less persuasive had the evidence been excluded. While we agree that it was error for the district court to admit the evidence without first weighing its probative value against the risk of unfair prejudice, we find the error harmless because the evidence of Miller’s guilt was overwhelming. We therefore affirm.”

Affirmed.

11-2506 U.S. v. Miller

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, Stiehl, J., Williams, J.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests