(a) Permitted Uses. In a criminal case in which a defendant is accused of a sexual assault, the court may admit evidence that the defendant committed any other sexual assault. The evidence may be considered on any matter to which it is relevant.
(b) Disclosure to the Defendant. If the prosecutor intends to offer this evidence, the prosecutor must disclose it to the defendant, including witnesses’ statements or a summary of the expected testimony. The prosecutor must do so at least 15 days before trial or at a later time that the court allows for good cause.
(c) Effect on Other Rules. This rule does not limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other rule.
(d) Definition of “Sexual Assault.” In this rule and Rule 415, “sexual assault” means a crime under federal law or under state law (as “state” is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 513) involving:
(1) any conduct prohibited by 18 U.S.C. chapter 109A;
(2) contact, without consent, between any part of the defendant’s body — or an object — and another person’s genitals or anus;
(3) contact, without consent, between the defendant’s genitals or anus and any part of another person’s body;
(4) deriving sexual pleasure or gratification from inflicting death, bodily injury, or physical pain on another person; or
(5) an attempt or conspiracy to engage in conduct described in subparagraphs (1)–(4).
Summary and Explanation
Federal Rule of Evidence 413 is a rule in the United States legal system that specifically addresses the admissibility of evidence in cases involving sexual assault. It forms a part of the Federal Rules of Evidence and has distinct provisions compared to other rules.
Key aspects of Rule 413 include:
- Admissibility of Similar Crimes in Sexual Assault Cases:
- General Principle: This rule allows for evidence of the defendant’s commission of any other sexual assault to be considered as evidence in a current sexual assault case. It means that if the defendant has committed sexual assault in the past, this information can be introduced to help prove their involvement in the current case.
- Rationale:
- Assessing Propensity: The primary purpose of Rule 413 is to show a defendant’s propensity or inclination to commit sexual assault. This is a notable departure from the general rule in criminal cases, where propensity evidence (evidence showing a person’s character to argue they acted in conformity with that character) is usually not admissible.
- Balancing Test:
- Despite the allowance for such evidence, there still needs to be a balancing test to ensure the evidence’s probative value (its usefulness in proving something important in the case) outweighs the potential for unfair prejudice against the defendant.
- Policy Considerations:
- Supporting Prosecutions: The rule is intended to assist in the prosecution of sexual assault cases, where the defendant’s past actions may be relevant to show a pattern of behavior.
- Controversy: The rule has been somewhat controversial because it deviates from the traditional rule against admitting propensity evidence, potentially impacting the fairness of the trial.
Federal Rule of Evidence 413 allows for the admission of evidence regarding a defendant’s previous sexual assaults in a current sexual assault case to show a propensity to commit such crimes. This rule is meant to aid in the prosecution of sexual assault cases but must be balanced against the risk of unfair prejudice towards the defendant. It represents a unique exception to the general rules regarding the admissibility of character evidence.
History
(Added Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXII, §320935(a), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2135; Apr. 26, 2011, eff. Dec. 1, 2011.)
Effective Date
Section 320935(b)–(e) of Pub. L. 103–322, as amended by Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, §101(a), [title I, §120], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009, 3009–25, provided that:
“(b) Implementation.—The amendments made by subsection (a) [enacting this rule and rules 414 and 415 of these rules] shall become effective pursuant to subsection (d).
“(c) Recommendations by Judicial Conference.—Not later than 150 days after the date of enactment of this Act [Sept. 13, 1994], the Judicial Conference of the United States shall transmit to Congress a report containing recommendations for amending the Federal Rules of Evidence as they affect the admission of evidence of a defendant’s prior sexual assault or child molestation crimes in cases involving sexual assault and child molestation. The Rules Enabling Act [ 28 U.S.C. 2072 ] shall not apply to the recommendations made by the Judicial Conference pursuant to this section.
“(d) Congressional Action.—
“(1) If the recommendations described in subsection (c) are the same as the amendment made by subsection (a), then the amendments made by subsection (a) shall become effective 30 days after the transmittal of the recommendations.
“(2) If the recommendations described in subsection (c) are different than the amendments made by subsection (a), the amendments made by subsection (a) shall become effective 150 days after the transmittal of the recommendations unless otherwise provided by law.
“(3) If the Judicial Conference fails to comply with subsection (c), the amendments made by subsection (a) shall become effective 150 days after the date the recommendations were due under subsection (c) unless otherwise provided by law.
“(e) Application.—The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply to proceedings commenced on or after the effective date of such amendments [July 9, 1995], including all trials commenced on or after the effective date of such amendments.”
[The Judicial Conference transmitted to Congress on Feb. 9, 1995, a report containing recommendations described in subsec. (c) that were different than the amendments made by subsec. (a). The amendments made by subsec. (a) became effective July 9, 1995.]
Committee Notes on Rules—2011 Amendment
The language of Rule 413 has been amended as part of the restyling of the Evidence Rules to make them more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. These changes are intended to be stylistic only. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.