Admissibility Of Evidence Concerning A Person’s Religious Beliefs

[SecularMotion]

In Ponzi scheme prosecution, admission of testimony by cooperating co-conspirator that he was a “moral, Christian man” on redirect after defendant had questioned the witness on why the jury should believe him did not violate FRE 610, in United States v. Dohan, 508 F.3d 989 (11th Cir. Nov. 28, 2007) (No. 06-14320) (per curiam), cert. denied, 553 U.S. 1032 (2008)

A little used Federal Rules of Evidence is FRE 610 concerning "evidence of the beliefs or opinions of a witness on matters of religion" which are proffered to "show that by reason of their nature the witness' credibility is impaired or enhanced." A 2007 case in the Eleventh Circuit tends to suggest an "opening the door" approach to the propriety of testimony referring to religious belief.

http://federalevidence.com/blog/2011/november/admissibility-evidence-concerning-person%E2%80%99s-religious-beliefs

[rug]

1. Courts have always allowed wide latitutde on evidence regarding a witness' credibility.

[SecularMotion]

2. Rule 610 Religious Beliefs or Opinions

Evidence of the beliefs or opinions of a witness on matters of religion is not admissible for the purpose of showing that by reason of their nature the witness' credibility is impaired or enhanced.

http://federalevidence.com/rules-of-evidence#Rule610

[rug]

4. In this case the defendant opened the door for the evidence.

'Ironically, noted the circuit, the defendant not only failed to object to the questioning, but “attempted upon recross to ask his own impermissibly religious question” of the co-conspirator.'

[struggle4progress]

3. US v Dohan

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-14320
D. C. Docket No. 00-00048 CR-3-008-LAC
November 28, 2007

William Scott Dohan appeals his conviction and sentence .. for conspiracy to commit wire fraud and security fraud, and for conspiracy to engage in or attempt to engage in money laundering ... Dohan argues that the government .. violated FED. R. EVID. 610 by soliciting comments from Gilliland about being a “moral, Christian man” ... Dohan’s contention that comments by Gilliland that he was a “moral, Christian man” violated FED. R. EVID. 610 fails. The government did not elicit the testimony on direct examination. The unsolicited comment came from the witness upon the prosecution’s redirect examination, responding to defense counsel’s having questioned him on why the jury should believe him at trial when he had previously committed perjury and other bad acts. Further questions by the prosecution were not for the purpose of showing that the witness’s credibility was enhanced by his religious beliefs. At no time did defense counsel object, but instead attempted upon recross to ask his own impermissibly religious question. Furthermore, the government agreed not to mention the unsolicited religious reference in its closing argument, where it even invited the jury to disregard Gilliland’s entire testimony if it wished, and convict on other evidence. The court concludes that there was no plain error ... Dohan’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED

pdf link from blog linked in OP: http://federalevidence.com/pdf/2007/11-November/US_v._Dohan.pdf