## Facts

- The United States prosecuted James Dale Brewer for kidnapping and interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle.
- The prosecution moved in limine to impeach Brewer, if he testified, with four prior convictions: a 1960 federal kidnapping conviction and three Ohio felonies (rape, aggravated assault, and assault with a deadly weapon) incurred while on parole.
- Brewer argued the convictions—especially the prior kidnapping—would create unfair prejudice and lead the jury to infer criminal propensity.
- The court treated the motion as requiring Rule 609(a) balancing of probative value for credibility against prejudicial effect to the accused.

## Issues

1. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a)(1), whether the probative value of Brewer’s prior felony convictions for impeachment outweighed their prejudicial effect if Brewer testified.
2. Whether the government could impeach Brewer with the three Ohio violent-felony convictions.
3. Whether the government could impeach Brewer with a prior federal kidnapping conviction when the current charge also involved kidnapping.

## Decision

- The court granted the government’s motion in part and denied it in part.
- The court permitted impeachment with the Ohio convictions for rape, aggravated assault, and assault with a deadly weapon.
- The court barred impeachment with Brewer’s prior federal kidnapping conviction because its prejudicial effect outweighed its probative value on credibility.

## Legal Principles

- Under Fed. R. Evid. 609(a)(1), felony convictions may be used to attack a testifying defendant’s credibility only if the court finds the probative value outweighs prejudicial effect to the accused.
- The proponent of admission bears the burden to show admissibility under Rule 609’s balancing requirement.
- Courts commonly evaluate Rule 609(a)(1) admissibility using factors including: (1) nature of the crime, (2) time of conviction and subsequent history, (3) similarity to the charged offense, (4) importance of the defendant’s testimony, and (5) centrality of credibility.
- A prior conviction for the same crime as the charged offense presents a heightened risk of unfair prejudice and propensity reasoning; when other convictions are available for impeachment, same-offense convictions are more likely to be excluded.

## Conclusion

The court applied Rule 609(a)(1) to allow impeachment by three serious felony convictions but excluded a prior kidnapping conviction because, in a kidnapping prosecution, its similarity to the charged offense created an undue risk the jury would misuse it as propensity evidence rather than for credibility assessment.


United States v. Brewer, 451 F. Supp. 50 (E.D. Tenn. 1978)