Doe v. United States - 666 F.2d 43 (4th Cir. 1981)

Rule:

Fed. R. Evid. 412(a) excludes reputation or opinion evidence of the past sexual behavior of the victim. Subsection (b) provides that evidence of past sexual behavior, other than reputation and opinion, is only admissible in three circumstances: first, a defendant may introduce this evidence when it is constitutionally required, 412(b)(1); second, when the defendant claims that he was not the source of semen or injury, he may introduce evidence of the victim's relations with other men, 412(b)(2)(A); and third, when the defendant claims the victim consented, he may testify about his prior relations with the victim, 412(b)(2)(B).

Facts:

Defendant Donald Robert Black was charged with the crime of rape. He filed a motion to introduce evidence of (1) the victim's general reputation around the Army post where defendant resided; (2) the victim's habit of calling out to the barracks to speak to various soldiers; (3) the victim's habit of coming to the post to meet people and of her habit of being at the barracks at the snack bar; (4) the victim's former landlord regarding his experience with her alleged promiscuous behavior; (5) what a social worker learned of the victim; (6) telephone conversations that defendant had with the victim; and (7) defendant's state of mind as a result of what he knew of her reputation and what she had said to him. The district court allowed all the evidence. Appellant, the rape victim and the chief government witness, appealed.

Issue:

Did the district court err in allowing all the evidence introduced by the defendant?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court reversed the judgment in part and held that Fed. R. Evid. 412(a) excluded the evidence in items 1-5 because it was reputation or opinion evidence of the past sexual behavior of the victim. According to the court, in a criminal case in which a person was accused of rape or of assault with intent to commit rape, reputation or opinion evidence of the past sexual behavior of an alleged victim of such rape was not admissible. However, the court affirmed the judgment in part, and held that the evidence in items 6 and 7 were admissible because the victim's conversations with defendant were relevant, and defendant's knowledge of the victim's past sexual behavior acquired before the crime was relevant on the issue of defendant's intent.