No. 20-8116

Carlos Bayon v. United States

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2021-05-25
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: circuit-split criminal-procedure evidence evidence-admissibility federal-rule-of-evidence-404(b) federal-rules-of-evidence judicial-discretion legal-interpretation rule-of-exclusion rule-of-inclusion
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2021-06-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) a rule of inclusion or exclusion?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) permits the admission of evidence of any other crime, wrong or act to prove a criminal defendant’s motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident. The Second, Eighth, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuits characterize this as a rule of inclusion, and as a result, other-acts evidence is routinely admitted. The Third, Fourth, and Seventh Circuits, however, reason that Rule 404(b) is a general rule of exclusion, meaning that it confers no presumption of admissibility. Is Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) a rule of inclusion or exclusion? 1

Docket Entries

2021-06-21
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/17/2021.
2021-05-27
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-05-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 24, 2021)

Attorneys

Carlos Bayon
Jamesa J. DrakeDrake Law LLC, Petitioner
Jamesa J. DrakeDrake Law LLC, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Respondent