Evidentiary Use in Criminal Cases of Collateral Crimes and Acts: A Comparison of the Federal Rules and Alabama Law
49 Pages Posted: 3 May 2011
Date Written: 1984
Abstract
In recent years, the use of evidence of collateral crimes has been the subject of considerable controversy. In particular, courts and commentators have expressed concern about the impeachment of a criminal defendant by the use of evidence of his prior convictions. A defendant who has a criminal record is seriously handicapped in presenting a defense. If he testifies in his own behalf, his record will be introduced and his chances of acquittal reduced as, inevitably, some jurors conclude that "if he did it before he did it now." Conversely, if the defendant chooses not to testify in his own behalf, the jury is deprived of information that might assist it in determining the truth and his silence, despite cautionary instructions, is likely to be used against him. Allowing proof of character as part of the case-in-chief and barring evidence of most prior offenses to impeach would ensure that every defendant could freely choose whether to testify and, at the same time, would guarantee the prosecution the opportunity to introduce relevant evidence of guilt without going through the present charade of introducing that evidence in the name of impeachment.
Keywords: evidence, criminal law, collateral crimes
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation