Evidence Properly Admitted Under FRE 413

U.S. v. Batton, 2010 WL 1632931 (4/23/10) (Published) - The defendant's 1995 conviction for having oral sex with a 14-year-old boy was admissible pursuant to Rule 413 with respect to the charge of transporting a 14-year-old boy across state lines in 2006 with the intent to engage in genital contact with the boy. While Rule 414 only applies to prior sexual contact with a child under 14, Rule 413 covers "sexual contact without consent" with a 14-year-old because a 14-year-old cannot legally consent under federal law. It doesn't matter that the current charge did not include actual sexual contact because Rule 413 covers attempts. Rule 403 did not prohibit admission of the conviction, although it was remote in time, because the offense for which the defendant was convicted and the current allegations were very similar, there were no intervening acts and the evidence of the prior conviction did not take up much court time. There was no prejudice because the court instructed the jury not to find guilt based on the prior conviction. In light of all the instructions, including that the jury could give whatever weight it wanted to the Rule 413 evidence, the instruction that the Rule 413 evidence could be used to show the improbability that the defendant was falsely accused did not create a mandatory presumption of guilt. Expert testimony about the "grooming" of child sex abuse victims was admissible to dispel misconceptions by jurors that the only people who commit sexual offenses are strangers, not trusted family members.