United States v. Daniel Draper

MEMORANDUM

1. Daniel Draper argues that the district court abused its discretion in excluding newspaper reports, arrest records, and witness testimony relating to prior arrests of the victim, Linford Dick. The district court reasoned that such evidence was inadmissible under Federal Rules of Evidence 404(b) and 802. Draper preserved his objection to the district court’s ruling by raising the issue at trial.

A defendant has acted in reasonable self-defense if he (1) had “a reasonable belief that the use of force was necessary to defend himself or another against the immediate use of unlawful force,” and (2) used “no more force than was reasonably necessary in the circumstances.” United States v. Biggs, 441 F.3d 1069, 1071 (9th Cir.2006). Draper contends that the excluded evidence was relevant to the first prong of this showing and should have been admitted. In United States v. James, 169 F.3d 1210 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc), we held that extrinsic evidence of the victim’s past violent acts should have been admitted to corroborate the defendant’s testimony that she had reason to fear the victim. Id. at 1214 . Although James provides some support for Draper’s argument, we need not…