Welcome to the digital.law repository at the University of Washington

[83WashLRev0317] Swiss Cheese That's All Hole: How Using Reading Material to Prove Criminal Intent Threatens the Propensity Rule

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Murphy, Jessica
dc.contributor.author Washington Law Review
dc.date.accessioned 2010-02-16T20:12:26Z
dc.date.available 2010-02-16T20:12:26Z
dc.date.issued 2008-05
dc.identifier.citation 83 Wash. L. Rev. 317 (2008) en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0043-0617
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1773.1/237
dc.description.abstract Abstract: In United States v. Curtin, the Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, held that Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) permits a defendant’s reading material to be introduced as evidence of his intent to commit a crime. The decision expressly overruled Guam v. Shymanovitz, an earlier Ninth Circuit opinion that called the admissibility of reading material into question. This Note argues that the Curtin decision failed to appreciate the extent to which reading material may reveal only a defendant’s propensity to commit a charged crime, rather than his or her intent to do so. To reduce the possibility that impermissible propensity evidence will be erroneously admitted, this Note proposes that courts considering the admissibility of reading material under Rule 404(b) more closely examine whether the evidence requires an inference about the defendant’s character or propensity to commit crimes. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Seattle: Washington Law Review, University of Washington School of Law en_US
dc.subject Note en_US
dc.title [83WashLRev0317] Swiss Cheese That's All Hole: How Using Reading Material to Prove Criminal Intent Threatens the Propensity Rule en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.rights.holder Copyright 2008 by Washington Law Review Association. en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search digital.law


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account