Background
David Zobel was charged with distributing child pornography and attempting to sexually exploit a minor. The government sought to introduce evidence of Zobel’s prior conviction for child molestation under Federal Rule of Evidence 414. The district court excluded the evidence under Rule 403, finding the risk of unfair prejudice substantially outweighed the probative value.
The court’s reasoning
The court held it had jurisdiction to review the exclusion under Section eighteen of the United States Code, Section three seven three one. The record suggested the district court misunderstood how Rule 414 affects the Rule 403 analysis in child molestation cases. Rule 414 lifts the general bar against propensity evidence for child molestation, allowing the factfinder to infer disposition from past acts. The district court must apply the correct legal framework before excluding evidence.
Rule 403 sets a high barrier for the exclusion of relevant evidence.
United States v. Lieu, 963 F.3d 122, 128 (D.C. Cir. 2020)
What it means going forward
Lower courts must correctly apply Rule 414 before applying Rule 403 when admitting prior child molestation evidence in sex offense trials.