United States v. Robert Caplette

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Robert James Caplette (“Ca-plette”) appeals from the district court’s decision to permit the prosecution to introduce under Federal Rule of Evidence 413 his prior juvenile adjudication for sexual assault in his trial for sexual assault. Ca-plette contends that his juvenile status when he committed the prior sex crime is a significant “intervening event” counseling against admission under the Rule 403 balancing test. Doe v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d 1258, 1268 (9th Cir.2000).

This case is controlled by this Court’s precedent in United States v. LeMay, 260 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir.2001). In LeMay , we held that “courts must consider whether the prior acts evidence was necessary to prove the case, along with other factors.” Id. at 1029 . Here, the district court acted within its discretion in determining admission of the evidence was proper because the testimony of the alleged victim that she was raped was challenged by the defendant who testified that she consented. See id. Furthermore, the prior sex crime had strong probative value because of the similar modus operandi. See id.

Caplette’s reliance on Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 , 125 S.Ct. 1183 , 161 L.Ed.2d 1…