BAKER v. TALLANT, 4:14-cv-04104. (2016)
Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20160609854
Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 08, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 08, 2016
Summary: ORDER BARRY A. BRYANT , Magistrate Judge . This is a civil rights action filed by Plaintiff, Lee Baker, pursuant to the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 1983 case. Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion in Limine to exclude past criminal history of Plaintiff and his witnesses. ECF No. 50. This matter is set for a bench trial on August 22, 2016 in Texarkana, Arkansas. Plaintiff's Motion in Limine asks the Court to exclude all current
Summary: ORDER BARRY A. BRYANT , Magistrate Judge . This is a civil rights action filed by Plaintiff, Lee Baker, pursuant to the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 1983 case. Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion in Limine to exclude past criminal history of Plaintiff and his witnesses. ECF No. 50. This matter is set for a bench trial on August 22, 2016 in Texarkana, Arkansas. Plaintiff's Motion in Limine asks the Court to exclude all current a..
More
ORDER
BARRY A. BRYANT, Magistrate Judge.
This is a civil rights action filed by Plaintiff, Lee Baker, pursuant to the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case. Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion in Limine to exclude past criminal history of Plaintiff and his witnesses. ECF No. 50.
This matter is set for a bench trial on August 22, 2016 in Texarkana, Arkansas. Plaintiff's Motion in Limine asks the Court to exclude all current and past criminal history of Plaintiff and the witnesses he intends to call at trial. Federal Rule of Evidence 609 (a) (1) and (2) specifically provides for the use of current or past criminal history for the purpose of attacking a witness's character for truthfulness subject to Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Under FRE 403 evidence will be admitted if the probative value outweighs the prejudicial effect. Therefore, evidence of current and past criminal history of Plaintiff and his witnesses will be allowed if the Court can readily determine that establishing the elements of the crime required proving—or the witness's admitting — a dishonest act or false statement. FRE 609 (a) (2).
Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion in Limine (ECF No. 50) is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
