Carter v. Hewitt, 617 F.2d 961 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

1980

Chapter

3

Title

A Contemporary Approach

Page

46

Topic

Relevance A Primer

Quick Notes

o         An inmate writes a letter to another inmate on how to file a bullshit complaint of police brutality, and later tries to exclude it as evidence using Rule 403.

Book Name

Evidence: A Contemporary Approach.  Sydney Beckman, Susan Crump, Fred Galves.  ISBN:  978-0-314-19105-2.

Issue

o         Whether a letter written by the plaintiff Carter, a prison inmate, violated the Federal Rules of Evidence when it was read and admitted into evidence at the trial of a 1983 action brought by Carter against prison authorities?  Yes

Procedure

Trial

o         Plaintiff inmate appealed the judgment of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, which found in favor of defendants, superintendent and prison authorities

Appellant

o         The court affirmed the district court's judgment entered in favor of the superintendent and the prison guards.

Facts

Discussion

Key Phrases

Rules

Pl Carter

Df Hewitt

Description

o         This case is about whether a letter written by the plaintiff Carter, a prison inmate, violated the Federal Rules of Evidence when it was read and admitted into evidence at the trial of a 1983 action brought by Carter against prison authorities.

o         Carter is a prison inmate.

o         He claims he was severely beaten during a police shakedown by 3 prison guards.

o         He wrote a letter about how to file a complaint concerning police brutality to another inmate.

Admitted and Denied

o         Carter admitted that he had written the letter, and also admitted that he had denied writing this same letter when he had been questioned as to its authorship in an earlier prison disciplinary proceeding.

Df - read the letter

o         Defense counsel asked Carter to read the letter.

Pl - Objected

o         Carter objected on the grounds of relevance, claiming that the letter had been written six months after the alleged beating

Carter Read Letter

o         Complying with the Magistrate's direction, Carter read the letter aloud.

o         The letter, which was undated, generally described to its unidentified recipient how to file a complaint charging prison guard brutality.

The Letter

o         This is a set up my brother - compile complaints to be used for bullshit courts, possibly news media, and a radio program in Pittsburg (sic) & W.D.A.S. down Philly.

o         We want to establish a pattern of barbaric brutal harassment (sic) and turn it on these chumps to the max.

Df Argues

o         Defense counsel suggested that this letter was a direction to file a false brutality complaint.

Carters Claim

o         Carter claimed that he was only encouraging the filing of a legitimate complaint.

Courts Comments

o         We believe, quite simply, that the letter is admissible, substantive evidence because it bears on the central factual issue in the case whether Carter was beaten by prison guards on September 22, 1977.

Rule 401

o         Evidence is relevant if it has "any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence." F.R.Evid. 401.

Court

o         A factfinder could reasonably interpret this letter as reflecting a plan on Carter's part to promote the filing of false complaints.

o         A factfinder could further draw the inference that Carter's own complaint about being beaten on September 22, 1977 had been filed pursuant to that plan.

o         Thus, the letter is relevant: it has some tendency to make Carter's assertion that he was beaten less likely to be true than it would be without the evidence.

o         Since the letter is relevant, it is also admissible, unless its admission is otherwise restricted. F.R.Evid. 402.

Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time

         Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

Court

o         This rule cannot help Carter.

         It does not offer protection against evidence that is merely prejudicial, in the sense of being detrimental to a party's case.

         Rather, the rule only protects against evidence that is unfairly prejudicial.

When Evidence is Unfairly Prejudicial

         Evidence is unfairly prejudicial only if it has "an undue tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis, commonly, though not necessarily, an emotional one."

Appeals to Sympathies

         It is unfairly prejudicial if it "appeals to the jury's sympathies, arouses its sense of horror, provokes its instinct to punish," or otherwise "may cause a jury to base its decision on something other than the established propositions in the case."

Criminal Record - Prohibited

         A classic example of unfair prejudice is a jury's conclusion, after hearing a recitation of a defendant's prior criminal record, that, since the defendant committed so many other crimes, he must have committed this one too.

         This is an improper basis of decision, and the law accordingly prohibits introduction of prior convictions to demonstrate a propensity to commit crime.

Court

         Carter has made no showing of unfair prejudice.

         He cannot claim exclusions of the letter under rule 403.

Rules

Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time

         Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

Class Notes