No. 25-6785

Nicholas Craig Woozencroft v. United States

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2026-02-12
Status: Pending
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: alternative-theories circuit-split criminal-jury-trial evidence-relevance federal-rules-of-evidence legal-standard
Latest Conference: N/A
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether evidence can satisfy Rule 401's relevance standard in criminal jury trials even if the evidence would not tend to disprove every alternative theory of guilt?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Generally, relevant evidence is admissible at trial. Evidence is relevant —in civil and criminal cases alike —if “it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence,” and “ the fact is of consequence in determining the action. ” Fed. R. Evid. 401. See also Fed. R. Evid. 1101(a) -(b). Under Seventh Circuit precedent, evidence need not tend to disprove every claim within an action to satisfy Rule 401. But that appears to be precisely what the Eleventh Circuit’s decision below requires, particularly where a jury is presented with alternative theories of a crime. The petitioner therefore asks whether evidence can satisfy Rule 401’s relevance standard in crim inal jury trials even if the evidence would not tend to disprove every alternative theory of guilt?

Docket Entries

2026-02-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 16, 2026)
2025-10-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 13, 2026)

Attorneys

Albert Anderson
Albert Anderson — Petitioner
Nicholas Woozencroft
Ta'Ronce Montavious StowesFederal Public Defender's Office, S District of Fl, Petitioner
Ta'Ronce Montavious StowesFederal Public Defender's Office, S District of Fl, Petitioner
Ta'Ronce Montavious StowesFederal Public Defender's Office, S District of Fl, Petitioner
United States
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent