## Facts

- Terry Kim Perrin rear-ended another vehicle on an Oklahoma highway; no one was injured, and Perrin walked to his nearby home.
- Oklahoma Highway Patrol Trooper Roland Von Schriltz went to Perrin’s home to obtain accident information; Trooper Donnie Anderson joined him.
- After prolonged knocking, Perrin opened the door and acted erratically, with rapidly changing moods and yelling that the accident was not his fault.
- When Von Schriltz moved his hand toward his gun, Perrin slammed the door; it bounced open and Perrin attacked Anderson.
- A physical struggle followed; Perrin knocked Anderson down and struck him, and the troopers testified they feared Perrin would overpower and kill them.
- Anderson shot and killed Perrin, testifying he feared losing consciousness and believed Perrin would kill both troopers.
- In the ensuing § 1983 excessive-force trial, defendants asserted self-defense and introduced evidence of Perrin’s prior violent encounters with police.
- Plaintiff sought damages for the minor son’s loss of companionship, prompting evidence about Perrin’s home environment, including pornographic materials found in the home.

## Issues

1. Whether testimony describing Perrin’s prior violent encounters with police was improperly admitted as character evidence or properly admitted as habit evidence under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
2. Whether an official Shooting Review Board report was admissible as a public record containing factual findings from an authorized investigation.
3. Whether defense counsel’s closing statement that the officers would be personally liable for any judgment warranted a new trial due to unfair prejudice.
4. Whether evidence of pornographic materials in Perrin’s home was relevant to damages and, if relevant, whether it should have been excluded as unfairly prejudicial.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed the judgment entered on the jury’s verdict for the defendant officers.
- The court upheld admission of testimony about multiple prior police encounters as habit evidence showing Perrin’s regular, specific response when confronted by uniformed officers.
- The court upheld admission of the Shooting Review Board report under the public-records hearsay exception because it reflected factual findings from an authorized investigation and was not shown untrustworthy.
- The court held the “personal liability” remark in closing argument did not justify reversal, particularly given the punitive-damages claim and the trial court’s discretion over argument and prejudice.
- The court upheld admission of evidence regarding pornographic materials in the home as relevant to the child’s loss-of-companionship damages and not excludable under the unfair-prejudice balancing test, noting limiting instructions.

## Legal Principles

- Repeated, similar acts may be admitted as habit under Federal Rule of Evidence 406 when they demonstrate a regular, specific, semi-automatic response to a recurring situation, rather than a general character trait.
- Even when evidence resembles impermissible propensity proof, an appellate court may affirm admission where the record supports a proper evidentiary basis (including habit) and the trial court did not abuse its discretion.
- Investigative reports of a public agency may be admitted under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(C) when they contain factual findings from an investigation conducted under legal authority, unless the opponent shows untrustworthiness.
- Trial courts have broad discretion to manage closing argument; challenged remarks warrant reversal only if they create sufficient prejudice to affect the verdict.
- Evidence relevant to damages may be admitted despite potential prejudice if its probative value is not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice under Rule 403, and limiting instructions may reduce the risk of misuse.

## Conclusion

The Tenth Circuit left intact a defense verdict in a § 1983 deadly-force case, holding that the district court acted within its discretion in admitting prior-encounter testimony as habit evidence, an official investigative report as a public record, contested closing argument about personal liability, and damages-related evidence about the decedent’s home environment.


Perrin v. Anderson, 784 F.2d 1040 (10th Cir. 1986)