Relevancy and reasons for excluding relevant evidence - Prior sexual misconduct of a defendant

Learning Outcomes

This article examines the specific rules under the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) governing the admissibility of a defendant's prior sexual misconduct. After reading this article, you will understand FRE 413, 414, and 415, which create exceptions to the general ban on character propensity evidence in cases involving sexual assault or child molestation, enabling you to apply these distinct rules to MBE fact patterns concerning evidence of prior similar acts in these specific contexts.

MBE Syllabus

For the MBE, you are required to understand the exceptions to the general prohibition against character evidence, specifically focusing on the admissibility of prior sexual misconduct under the Federal Rules of Evidence. This includes:

  • Distinguishing the rules for prior sexual misconduct (FRE 413-415) from the general character evidence rule (FRE 404).
  • Identifying the types of cases where FRE 413 (sexual assault) and FRE 414 (child molestation) apply in criminal proceedings.
  • Understanding that under FRE 413 and 414, evidence of the defendant's prior commission of such offenses is admissible for any relevant purpose, including propensity.
  • Recognizing the application of FRE 415 in civil cases concerning sexual assault or child molestation.
  • Understanding the procedural requirements, such as notice, associated with offering evidence under these rules.
  • Analyzing the interplay between these rules and FRE 403 (balancing probative value against unfair prejudice).

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

  1. In a federal criminal trial for sexual assault, the prosecution seeks to introduce evidence that the defendant committed a similar, uncharged sexual assault five years prior. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, this evidence is:
    1. Inadmissible character evidence under FRE 404(b).
    2. Admissible under FRE 413 to show the defendant's propensity to commit sexual assault.
    3. Admissible only if the prior act resulted in a conviction.
    4. Inadmissible unless the defendant first offers evidence of his good character.
  2. FRE 414 allows for the admission of evidence of a defendant's prior commission of child molestation offenses in a criminal case involving child molestation. This evidence can be used to prove:
    1. Motive or identity only.
    2. Propensity to commit child molestation only.
    3. Any matter to which it is relevant, including propensity.
    4. Only if the prior act is substantially similar to the charged offense.
  3. A plaintiff brings a civil suit against a defendant for battery based on an alleged sexual assault. The plaintiff seeks to introduce evidence that the defendant committed a similar sexual assault against another person two years ago. This evidence is:
    1. Generally inadmissible under FRE 404.
    2. Admissible under FRE 415 for any relevant purpose, including propensity.
    3. Admissible only if the defendant testifies and puts his character in issue.
    4. Admissible only to show absence of mistake.

Introduction

The general principle under the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE 404(a)) is that character evidence is not admissible to prove that a person acted in accordance with that character trait on a particular occasion – often referred to as the prohibition against "propensity" evidence. FRE 404(b) similarly bars evidence of prior crimes, wrongs, or other acts to prove a person's character to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character. However, Congress created specific, controversial exceptions to this rule for cases involving sexual assault and child molestation through FRE 413, 414, and 415. These rules permit the introduction of evidence of a defendant's prior sexual misconduct for essentially any relevant purpose, including propensity.

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 413-415

FRE 413, 414, and 415 represent significant departures from the traditional character evidence rules. They apply specifically to sexual assault and child molestation cases and allow evidence of the defendant's prior similar acts to be admitted for their bearing on any relevant matter, including the defendant's character and propensity to commit the charged offense.

Key Term: Prior Sexual Misconduct Evidence Under FRE 413-415, evidence that the defendant committed other sexual assaults or child molestations, admissible in certain cases for any relevant matter, including propensity.

FRE 413: Evidence of Similar Crimes in Sexual Assault Cases

Rule 413 applies in a criminal case in which the defendant is accused of an offense of sexual assault.

  • Admissibility: Evidence that the defendant committed any other offense or offenses of sexual assault is admissible and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant. This explicitly includes using the evidence to show the defendant's propensity to commit sexual assault.
  • Timing/Conviction: The prior offense need not have resulted in a conviction. The rule applies to evidence of the commission of the prior offense.
  • Disclosure: The prosecutor must disclose the evidence to the defendant, including witnesses' statements or a summary of the expected testimony, at least 15 days before trial (unless the court allows less time for good cause).

FRE 414: Evidence of Similar Crimes in Child Molestation Cases

Rule 414 mirrors Rule 413 but applies in a criminal case in which the defendant is accused of an offense of child molestation.

  • Admissibility: Evidence that the defendant committed any other offense or offenses of child molestation is admissible and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant, including propensity.
  • Timing/Conviction: The prior offense need not have resulted in a conviction.
  • Disclosure: The same disclosure requirements as under FRE 413 apply.

FRE 415: Evidence of Similar Acts in Civil Cases Concerning Sexual Assault or Child Molestation

Rule 415 extends the principles of Rules 413 and 414 to civil cases in which a claim for relief is predicated on a party's alleged offense of sexual assault or child molestation.

  • Admissibility: Evidence of a party's commission of any other offense or offenses of sexual assault or child molestation is admissible and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant, including the party's propensity.
  • Disclosure: The party intending to offer such evidence must disclose it to the party against whom it will be offered at least 15 days before trial (unless the court allows less time for good cause).

Interplay with FRE 403

Evidence offered under Rules 413, 414, or 415 is still subject to the balancing test of FRE 403. The court retains discretion to exclude the evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. However, given the explicit congressional intent behind these rules, courts may be less inclined to exclude such evidence under Rule 403 than they might be with other types of propensity evidence.

Worked Example 1.1

Defendant is charged with the sexual assault of Victim 1. The prosecution seeks to introduce testimony from Victim 2, who will state that Defendant sexually assaulted her in a similar manner three years earlier. Defendant was never charged or convicted for the assault on Victim 2. Is Victim 2's testimony likely admissible?

Answer: Yes, likely admissible under FRE 413. The current case involves a charge of sexual assault. FRE 413 permits evidence that the defendant committed another sexual assault for any relevant purpose, including propensity. The prior act does not need to have resulted in a charge or conviction. The prosecution must provide the required notice to the defense. The evidence is still subject to FRE 403 balancing, but given Rule 413's purpose, it is likely admissible unless its probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice (e.g., if the prior act is remote in time or significantly different in nature, making its probative value low, or if its details are particularly inflammatory).

Worked Example 1.2

Plaintiff sues Defendant in federal court for damages resulting from an alleged incident of child molestation that occurred last year. Plaintiff wishes to introduce evidence that Defendant was convicted 10 years ago for child molestation involving a different victim. Is this evidence admissible?

Answer: Yes, likely admissible under FRE 415. This is a civil case where the claim is based on alleged child molestation. FRE 415 allows evidence of Defendant's prior commission of child molestation for any relevant purpose, including propensity. The fact that it was a conviction strengthens the reliability, although conviction is not required. The 10-year gap might reduce probative value, but it does not automatically make it inadmissible; it would be considered under the FRE 403 balancing test. Plaintiff must provide the required notice to Defendant.

Exam Warning

Do not confuse the specific rules under FRE 413-415 with the general character evidence rules under FRE 404. FRE 404(a) prohibits using character evidence for propensity purposes, and FRE 404(b) prohibits using prior acts for propensity, allowing them only for non-propensity purposes (motive, intent, identity, etc.). FRE 413-415 create explicit exceptions for prior sexual misconduct in specific types of cases, specifically allowing propensity use. Always identify the type of case (criminal vs. civil) and the nature of the charge (sexual assault/child molestation vs. other crimes) to determine which rule applies.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

  • The general rule (FRE 404) prohibits character evidence, including prior bad acts, to prove propensity.
  • FRE 413, 414, and 415 create specific exceptions for evidence of a defendant's prior sexual misconduct.
  • FRE 413 applies to criminal cases involving charges of sexual assault.
  • FRE 414 applies to criminal cases involving charges of child molestation.
  • FRE 415 applies to civil cases involving claims based on sexual assault or child molestation.
  • Under FRE 413-415, evidence of prior commissions of sexual assault or child molestation is admissible for any relevant purpose, including proving the defendant's propensity to commit such acts.
  • The prior act does not need to have resulted in a conviction to be admissible under these rules.
  • Parties seeking to introduce such evidence must comply with notice requirements.
  • Evidence admissible under FRE 413-415 is still subject to balancing under FRE 403 (probative value vs. unfair prejudice).

Key Terms and Concepts

  • Prior Sexual Misconduct Evidence
The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
AdaptiBar
One-time Fee
$395
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
BarPrepHero
One-time Fee
$299
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350
Quimbee
One-time Fee
$1,199

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal