Old Chief v. United States
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Old_Chief_v._United_States an entity of type: Thing
Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997), discussed the limitation on admitting relevant evidence set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Under this rule, otherwise relevant evidence may be excluded if the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, or considerations of undue delay, wasting time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. In this case, Old Chief offered to stipulate to the fact of a prior conviction, which was an element of the crime with which he was charged. The prosecution resisted this stipulation, arguing that it had the right to present its case in any manner it chose. In Old Chief, the Court applied Rule 403 to the particular situation presented by this c
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Old Chief v. United States
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Johnny Lynn Old Chief v. United States of America
xsd:integer
9243389
xsd:integer
895901223
rdf:langString
O'Connor
rdf:langString
Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas
rdf:langString
Stevens, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer
rdf:langString
Fed. R. Evid. 403
<second>
172800.0
<second>
25920.0
xsd:integer
172
xsd:integer
519
xsd:gMonthDay
--10-16
xsd:integer
1996
rdf:langString
Old Chief v. United States,
xsd:gMonthDay
--01-07
xsd:integer
1997
rdf:langString
Johnny Lynn Old Chief v. United States of America
rdf:langString
Where the prior conviction is an element of the crime charged, evidence of a defendant's prior conviction may not be admitted if the defendant is willing to concede to the fact of the conviction.
rdf:langString
Old Chief v. United States
rdf:langString
Souter
rdf:langString
FederalEvidence.com
rdf:langString
Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997), discussed the limitation on admitting relevant evidence set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Under this rule, otherwise relevant evidence may be excluded if the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, or considerations of undue delay, wasting time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. In this case, Old Chief offered to stipulate to the fact of a prior conviction, which was an element of the crime with which he was charged. The prosecution resisted this stipulation, arguing that it had the right to present its case in any manner it chose. In Old Chief, the Court applied Rule 403 to the particular situation presented by this case, and concluded that Rule 403 required the trial court to accept the defendant's stipulation to a prior conviction over the prosecution's objection.
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
9906