## Facts

- Ralph Edward Estes, a convicted felon, was stopped by a deputy for a traffic violation.
- The deputy discovered Estes possessed a firearm.
- Estes was charged and convicted in federal court of being a felon in possession of a firearm.
- The government’s key trial witness was Deputy Douglas Yeager, who described the traffic stop and firearm discovery.
- Yeager had a misdemeanor conviction for impersonating a public official that was about twelve years old at the time of trial.
- Estes sought to impeach Yeager with that conviction.
- The government moved in limine to exclude the conviction under Federal Rule of Evidence 609(b).
- The district court excluded the conviction as too remote and did not state a Rule 609(b) balancing analysis on the record.
- Estes received 180 months’ imprisonment and three years of supervised release.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion under Federal Rule of Evidence 609(b) by excluding impeachment evidence of a government witness’s twelve-year-old misdemeanor conviction.
2. Whether the district court committed reversible error by not making an explicit, on-the-record Rule 609(b) balancing analysis when it excluded the over-ten-year-old conviction.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence.
- The district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding the twelve-year-old misdemeanor conviction under Rule 609(b).
- The district court’s failure to articulate an on-the-record Rule 609(b) balancing was not reversible error because the conviction was excluded, not admitted.

## Legal Principles

- Under Federal Rule of Evidence 609(b), convictions more than ten years old are generally disfavored for impeachment and are ordinarily excluded absent exceptional justification.
- The trial court’s decision to admit or exclude impeachment convictions under Rule 609 is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- A specific, on-the-record finding that probative value substantially outweighs prejudicial effect is required when a court admits an over-ten-year-old conviction; the rule does not require such findings when the court excludes the conviction.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit upheld the exclusion of a twelve-year-old misdemeanor impeachment conviction and clarified that Rule 609(b)’s on-the-record balancing requirement applies only when a remote conviction is admitted into evidence, not when it is excluded.


United States v. Estes, 994 F.2d 147 (5th Cir. 1993)