## Facts

- Steven Washington was a passenger in a car driven by a suspected bank robber when federal officers attempted to stop the vehicle.
- A high-speed chase ensued in Queens, New York, ending when the car was blocked.
- Washington exited as if to surrender, then fled into a crowd; officers chased and cornered him in an alley.
- Washington brandished a gun at approaching officers and was shot.
- Washington was indicted for (1) assaulting federal officers (18 U.S.C. §§ 111, 1114) and (2) possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (18 U.S.C. app. § 1202(a)(1)).
- To prove the felon-status element, the government introduced a stipulation that Washington had a prior felony conviction.
- The district court mentioned the prior conviction in its charge but refused a defense request to instruct the jury that the prior conviction could be considered only for the felon-status element and not as propensity evidence.
- The jury convicted on both counts; Washington received eight years’ imprisonment on the assault count and a suspended two-year sentence on the firearm count.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court committed reversible error by refusing, upon request, to give a Federal Rule of Evidence 105 limiting instruction restricting the jury’s use of a stipulated prior felony conviction introduced only to prove felon status in a firearm-possession charge.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit reversed and remanded.
- The court held that the district court erred by refusing the requested limiting instruction concerning the stipulated prior felony conviction.
- The error was treated as prejudicial rather than harmless because unrestricted consideration of the prior conviction risked improper propensity reasoning.

## Legal Principles

- Under Federal Rule of Evidence 105, when evidence is admissible for a limited purpose but not for other uses, the court must give a limiting instruction upon a proper request.
- Evidence of prior criminal convictions, even when admissible to prove an element such as felon status, poses a substantial risk of unfair prejudice if the jury is not instructed to avoid character or propensity inferences.
- In the Second Circuit, failure to provide a requested limiting instruction for limited-purpose prior-crimes evidence constitutes reversible error when the omission may affect the jury’s evaluation of the charged conduct.

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit held that when a defendant’s prior felony conviction is admitted solely to prove felon status in a firearm-possession charge, the trial court must, upon request, instruct the jury under Rule 105 to use that evidence only for that limited purpose; refusing to do so required reversal and a remand for further proceedings.


United States v. Washington, 592 F.2d 680 (2d Cir. 1979)