In criminal cases, the defendant may "open the door" by offering evidence of a pertinent good character trait, after which the prosecution may rebut with evidence of the same trait. Character evidence is typically presented through reputation or opinion testimony under Rule 405(a). The prosecution cannot introduce character evidence in its case-in-chief unless the defendant opens the door. In civil cases, character evidence is generally inadmissible to prove conduct, though Rule 404(b) allows evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts for non-character purposes such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident.
Defense Attorney: "Pastor Williams, are you familiar with the defendant's reputation for truthfulness in the community?" Witness: "Yes, he is widely known as an honest person." — The defendant has opened the door to character evidence.
Prosecutor: "Your Honor, I offer evidence of the defendant's prior bank robbery not to show propensity, but to show a common plan or scheme — the same disguise, the same demand note format, and the same escape route pattern." Judge: "I'll admit it for the limited purpose of showing plan under 404(b)."
Attorney: "Objection, Your Honor. This is impermissible character evidence. Counsel is trying to prove my client acted violently on this occasion by showing he was violent in the past." Judge: "Sustained. The jury will disregard."
Students often confuse the prohibition on character evidence under Rule 404(a) with the permission to use other-acts evidence under Rule 404(b). Rule 404(b) does not create a "character evidence exception" — it allows evidence of other acts for non-character purposes. The evidence must be relevant for a purpose other than proving propensity.
FRE 404 restricts character evidence in both civil and criminal cases, but some states are more permissive. Several states allow character evidence in civil cases involving assault or negligent entrustment where federal courts would exclude it.
Michelson v. United States, 335 U.S. 469 (1948)
Established the framework for character evidence in criminal cases, holding that once a defendant opens the door with good character evidence, the prosecution may cross-examine character witnesses about specific acts.
Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (1988)
Held that Rule 404(b) other-acts evidence need only satisfy Rule 104(b) conditional relevance standard — the court need not find the prior act proved by a preponderance before admitting the evidence.
United States v. Guardia, 135 F.3d 1326 (10th Cir. 1998)
Articulated the four-part test for admissibility of Rule 404(b) evidence: offered for a proper purpose, relevant, probative value not substantially outweighed by prejudice, and accompanied by a limiting instruction if requested.
| 404(a) Character Evidence | 404(b) Other Acts Evidence |
|---|---|
| Proves person acted in conformity with character trait | Proves motive, intent, plan, knowledge, identity, etc. |
| Generally prohibited in prosecution case-in-chief | Available to prosecution in case-in-chief if relevant |
| Proved by reputation or opinion only (Rule 405(a)) | Proved by specific instances of conduct |
| Defendant must "open the door" first | No door-opening requirement |
| Limited to pertinent character traits | Must be relevant for non-propensity purpose |
| Rule 403 balancing applies | Rule 403 balancing applies (often more strictly) |
When can character evidence be used in a criminal case?
In a criminal case, the defendant may introduce evidence of a pertinent good character trait (opening the door), after which the prosecution may rebut with evidence of the same trait. The prosecution cannot introduce character evidence in its case-in-chief unless the defendant opens the door or the evidence falls under Rule 404(b).
What is the difference between Rule 404(a) and Rule 404(b)?
Rule 404(a) prohibits using character evidence to prove a person acted in conformity with a character trait on a particular occasion. Rule 404(b) allows evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts for non-character purposes such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake.
Is character evidence admissible in civil cases?
Character evidence is generally inadmissible in civil cases to prove conduct in conformity with a character trait. However, character is admissible when it is an essential element of a claim or defense, such as in defamation cases, negligent entrustment, or child custody proceedings.
What are the methods of proving character under the Federal Rules?
Under Rule 405, character may be proved by reputation or opinion testimony when character evidence is admissible under Rule 404(a). Specific instances of conduct are only admissible on cross-examination of character witnesses or when character is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense.
Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than...
Impeachment is the process of attacking a witness's credibility to reduce the weight the jury gives ...
Circumstantial evidence is evidence that requires an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact...
Foundation refers to the preliminary showing that must be made before evidence is admitted. It estab...
Apply your knowledge of this term in a realistic courtroom simulation
Start a Mock Trial