Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_05-cr-00172/USCOURTS-azd-3_05-cr-00172-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Earl James
Defendant
United States of America
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Earl James, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CR 05-0172 PCT-DGC

ORDER

A status conference was held on July 24, 2006. Several matters were discussed. The

Court will address these matters individually.

A. Defendant’s Motion in Limine.

Defendant has filed a motion in limine to preclude evidence related to a prior

conviction for sexual assault. Doc. #53. The Government has filed a response. Doc. #59.

Defense counsel stated at the status conference that he would submit the issue to the Court

on the memoranda. 

Rule 414(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence states that “[i]n a criminal case in which

the defendant is accused of an offense of child molestation, evidence of the defendant’s

commission of another offense or offenses of child molestation is admissible, and may be

considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant.” The Ninth Circuit has held

that the limitations of Rule 403 apply to the application of Rule 414. “Because of the

inherent strength of the evidence that is covered by [Rule 414], when putting this type of

evidence through the [403] microscope, a court should pay ‘careful attention to both the

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 1 of 26
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

significant probative value and the strong prejudicial qualities’ of that evidence.” Doe ex.

rel. Rudy-Glanzer v. Glanzer, 232 F.3d 1258, 1268 (9th Cir. 2000) (quoting United States v.

Guardia, 135 F.3d 1326, 1330 (10th Cir. 1998)). The Ninth Circuit has articulated several

non-exclusive factors to be considered in this analysis: (1) the similarity of the prior acts to

the acts charged, (2) the closeness in time of the prior acts to the acts charged, (3) the

frequency of the prior acts, (4) the presence or lack of intervening circumstances, and (5) the

necessity of the evidence beyond the testimonies already offered at trial. United States v.

LeMay, 260 F.3d 1018, 1028 (9th Cir. 2001). 

Although the parties have provided substantial information related to this analysis, the

Court concludes that it cannot make a final determination on this issue until trial. The Court

will discuss the factors set forth in LeMay in this order, and will conduct an additional

consideration of those factors during trial. 

First, the Government asserts that the prior conduct for which Defendant was

convicted is very similar to the conduct at issue in this case – the alleged sexual assault,

through actual or attempted anal intercourse, of male children. The Government has

provided the Court with a complaint from Defendant’s prior case that confirms the nature of

the prior charges. Assuming that the complaint contains all of the information that will be

available at trial concerning the prior charges, it does appear that the previously charged

sexual assaults were very similar to the assaults allegedly committed in this case.

Second, although the prior sexual assaults occurred in 1982 and resulted in

Defendant’s guilty plea in 1983, the Government contends that this is not too remote in time.

Commentators seem to agree: “The time lapse between the prior offense and the charged

offense is more likely to affect the weight than the admissibility of the evidence. The

language of the rule does not address this problem, but the legislative history indicates that

‘there is no time limit beyond which prior sex offenses by a defendant are inadmissible.’”

2 Jack V. Weinstein & Margaret A. Berger, Weinstein’s Federal Evidence, § 413.03[1]

(Joseph M. McLaughlin, ed. Matthew Bender 2d ed. 2006) (quoting United States v.

Meacham, 115 F.3d 1488, 1492 (10th Cir. 1997)). The Government cites the Meacham

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 2 of 26
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

decision, in which the prior acts occurred 30 years earlier, and United States v. Larson, 112

F.3d 600 (2nd Cir. 1997), in which the prior acts occurred 16 to 20 years earlier. The fact

that the Ninth Circuit has identified proximity in time as one of the factors to be considered

in a Rule 414 analysis, however, suggests that it has at least some relevance to the Court’s

decision. 

Third, the parties spent little time addressing the frequency of the prior acts. It

appears that there were two assaults in 1982 and two alleged assaults in this case. The

assaults, separated by more than 20 years, could not reasonably be characterized as

“frequent.”

Fourth, the parties have identified no intervening circumstances other than the passage

of time. Defendant has pointed to no other events in his life that would make it less likely

that he would repeat sexually predatory conduct.

Fifth, the Court cannot at this time assess the necessity of the evidence beyond the

testimony to be offered at trial. The Government has asserted that the only evidence in this

case will be testimony of the victim, his brother, and his parents. Because the two key

witnesses are children who have given somewhat varying accounts of the assault, the

Government suggests that the Rule 414 evidence is necessary for the jury to accurately assess

the credibility of all witnesses. The Court will consider this issue after it has heard opening

statements and has some sense for the evidence to be presented during trial.

The Government should not discuss the Rule 414 evidence during opening arguments.

The Court will rule on the admissibility of the prior criminal acts after it has heard opening

statements and at least some testimony from the Government’s witnesses. The parties

should consider what, if any, limiting instructions should be given if the Court determines

that the evidence is admissible.

B. Defendant’s Competency.

A question was raised earlier in this case concerning Defendant’s competency to stand

trial. As a result, Defendant was examined at the Government’s Metropolitan Detention

Center in Los Angeles, California. The Court has now received a Forensic Evaluation dated

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 3 of 26
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 4 -

January 10, 2006, and a letter from the Warden of the Metropolitan Detention Center dated

January 25, 2006. The Forensic Evaluation concludes that there is no objective information

or evidence to indicate that Defendant suffers from signs or symptoms of a major mental

disorder that would impair his ability to understand the nature and consequences of the court

proceedings against him or his ability to properly assist counsel in his defense. Defendant has

presented no contrary evidence or argument, and defense counsel indicated at the status

conference that he would submit the issue of Defendant’s competency to the Court on the

basis of the Forensic Evaluation. 

On the basis of the Forensic Evaluation signed by Lisa Hope, Psy.D., and Ralph Ihle,

Ph.D., and the absence of any controverting evidence, the Court finds that Defendant is

competent to stand trial.

C. Proposed Voir Dire and Preliminary Jury Instructions.

Attached to this Order are the Court’s proposed voir dire and preliminary jury

instructions. These will be discussed at the final conference to be held at 9:00 a.m. on

August 7, 2006.

DATED this 28th day of July, 2006.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 4 of 26
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Earl James, 

Defendant. 

_________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CR 05-172 PCT-DGC

COURT’S PROPOSED PRELIMINARY JURY INSTRUCTIONS

AND VOIR DIRE

DATED: July 28, 2006

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 5 of 26
1.1 DUTY OF JURY

Ladies and gentlemen: You now are the jury in this case, and I want to take a few

minutes to tell you something about your duties as jurors and to give you some instructions.

These are preliminary instructions. At the end of the trial I will give you more detailed

instructions. Those instructions will control your deliberations.

You should not take anything I may say or do during the trial as indicating what I

think of the evidence or what your verdict should be.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 6 of 26
1.2 THE CHARGE – PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE

This is a criminal case brought by the United States government. The government

charges the defendant with [crime[s] charged]. The charge[s] against the defendant [is] [are]

contained in the indictment. The indictment is simply the description of the charge[s] made

by the government against the defendant; it is not evidence of anything.

[In order to help you follow the evidence, I will now give you a brief summary of the

elements of the crime[s] which the government must prove to make its case: [supply brief

statement of elements of crime[s]]. These instructions are preliminary and the instructions

I will give at the end of the case will control.]

The defendant has pleaded not guilty to the charge[s] and is presumed innocent unless

and until proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. A defendant has the right to remain silent

and never has to prove innocence or present any evidence.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 7 of 26
1.3 WHAT IS EVIDENCE

The evidence you are to consider in deciding what the facts are consists of:

(1) the sworn testimony of any witness;

(2) the exhibits which are received into evidence; and

(3) any facts to which all the lawyers stipulate.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 8 of 26
1.4 WHAT IS NOT EVIDENCE

The following things are not evidence, and you must not consider them as evidence

in deciding the facts of this case:

1. statements and arguments of the attorneys;

2. questions and objections of the attorneys;

3. testimony that I instruct you to disregard; and

4. anything you may see or hear when the court is not in session even if what you

see or hear is done or said by one of the parties or by one of the witnesses.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 9 of 26
1.5 EVIDENCE FOR LIMITED PURPOSE

Some evidence is admitted for a limited purpose only. When I instruct you that an

item of evidence has been admitted for a limited purpose, you must consider it only for that

limited purpose and for no other.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 10 of 26
1.6 DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Evidence may be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof of a fact,

such as testimony by a witness about what that witness personally saw or heard or did.

Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence, that is, it is proof of one or more facts from

which one can find another fact. You are to consider both direct and circumstantial evidence.

The law permits you to give equal weight to both, but it is for you to decide how much

weight to give to any evidence.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 11 of 26
1.7 RULING ON OBJECTIONS

There are rules of evidence which control what can be received into evidence. When

a lawyer asks a question or offers an exhibit into evidence and a lawyer on the other side

thinks that it is not permitted by the rules of evidence, that lawyer may object. If I overrule

the objection, the question may be answered or the exhibit received. If I sustain the objection,

the question cannot be answered, and the exhibit cannot be received. Whenever I sustain an

objection to a question, you must ignore the question and must not guess what the answer

would have been.

Sometimes I may order that evidence be stricken from the record and that you

disregard or ignore the evidence. That means that when you are deciding the case, you must

not consider the evidence which I told you to disregard.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 12 of 26
1.8 CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES

In deciding the facts in this case, you may have to decide which testimony to believe

and which testimony not to believe. You may believe everything a witness says, or part of

it, or none of it.

In considering the testimony of any witness, you may take into account:

1. the opportunity and ability of the witness to see or hear or know the things

testified to;

2. the witness's memory;

3. the witness's manner while testifying;

4. the witness's interest in the outcome of the case and any bias or prejudice;

5. whether other evidence contradicted the witness's testimony;

6. the reasonableness of the witness's testimony in light of all the evidence; and

7. any other factors that bear on believability.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 13 of 26
1.9 CONDUCT OF THE JURY

I will now say a few words about your conduct as jurors.

First, you are not to discuss this case with anyone, including your fellow jurors,

members of your family, people involved in the trial, or anyone else, nor are you allowed to

permit others to discuss the case with you. If anyone approaches you and tries to talk to you

about the case, please let me know about it immediately; 

Second, do not read any news stories or articles or listen to any radio or television

reports about the case or about anyone who has anything to do with it;

Third, do not do any research, such as consulting dictionaries, searching the Internet

or using other reference materials, and do not make any investigation about the case on your

own;

Fourth, if you need to communicate with me simply give a signed note to the clerk to

give to me; and

Fifth, do not make up your mind about what the verdict should be until after you have

gone to the jury room to decide the case and you and your fellow jurors have discussed the

evidence. Keep an open mind until then.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 14 of 26
1.10 NO TRANSCRIPT AVAILABLE TO JURY

At the end of the trial you will have to make your decision based on what you recall

of the evidence. You will not have a written transcript of the trial. I urge you to pay close

attention to the testimony as it is given.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 15 of 26
1.11 TAKING NOTES

If you wish, you may take notes to help you remember what witnesses said. If you

do take notes, please keep them to yourself until you and your fellow jurors go to the jury

room to decide the case. Do not let note taking distract you so that you do not hear other

answers by witnesses. When you leave, your notes should be left in the court room.

Whether or not you take notes, you should rely on your own memory of what was

said. Notes are only to assist your memory. You should not be overly influenced by the notes.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 16 of 26
1.12 OUTLINE OF TRIAL

The next phase of the trial will now begin. First, each side may make an opening

statement. An opening statement is not evidence. It is simply an outline to help you

understand what that party expects the evidence will show. A party is not required to make

an opening statement.

The government will then present evidence and counsel for the defendant may

cross-examine. Then, the defendant may present evidence and counsel for the government

may cross-examine.

After the evidence has been presented, the attorneys will make closing arguments and

I will instruct you on the law that applies to the case.

After that, you will go to the jury room to deliberate on your verdict.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 17 of 26
2.2 BENCH CONFERENCES AND RECESSES

From time to time during the trial, it may become necessary for me to talk with the

attorneys out of the hearing of the jury, either by having a conference at the bench when the

jury is present in the courtroom, or by calling a recess. Most often these conferences will

involve determination as to whether evidence is admissible under the rules of evidence. It

is appropriate to take these matters up outside the presence of the jury. Should I conclude

that a more prolonged discussion is necessary, I may excuse you from the courtroom. 

We will, of course, do what we can to keep the number and length of these

conferences to a minimum. I may not always grant an attorney's request for a conference. Do

not consider my granting or denying a request for a conference as any indication of my

opinion of the case or of what your verdict should be.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 18 of 26
1

CRIMINAL VOIR DIRE QUESTIONS

1. Read statement of the case.

• Have any of you read or heard anything about this case from any source

whatsoever? 

• Given this brief description of the facts, is there anything about this case that

would cause you to believe that you could not consider the evidence fairly and

impartially according to the law?

2. Introduce self and staff: Lisa Richter, Tricia Lyons, Jeff Kilmark, Nicole Nakaji, and

Nancy Johnson. Do any of you know me or any member of my staff on any basis,

social, professional or otherwise?

2. The United States is represented by Diane Humetewa. Counsel please stand. She is

an assistant United States attorney.

• The United States attorney is Paul K. Charlton. Do any of you know

counsel, or the United States attorney, or any of the employees in their office

on any basis, social, professional or otherwise?

• Counsel, please introduce your investigator. Do any of you know the

investigator or any employees of his/her office on any basis, social,

professional or otherwise?

3. The defendant is represented by Gerald A. Williams. Counsel please stand.

• Do any of you know the defendant’s attorney or any employees of his office

on any basis, social, professional or otherwise?

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 19 of 26
2

• Counsel, please introduce your client. Do any of you know the defendant on

any basis, social, professional, or otherwise? (Ask in detail about lawyers

from the same office, if appropriate.)

4. The witnesses who may be called during this trial are: (See Witness Tab):

• Do any of you know or think you might know any of these witnesses?

5. Have you or any members of your family, including brothers, sisters, parents or

children, or close friends, ever been the victims of criminal conduct? (give small

example)

• If yes, please explain including what the incident was, what police agency

investigated, did you have to make a statement, and was the responsible party

apprehended?

• Do you think this experience would prevent you from being fair and impartial

in this case?

6. Have you or any members of your family ever been convicted of a felony?

• If so, which family member, what offense, and what was the disposition? 

• Do you think this experience would prevent you from being fair and impartial

in this case?

7. Have you or any members of your family or close friends ever served in the capacity

of law enforcement officer:

• Please note that in the definition of law enforcement officer, I am including not

only police officers, but also employees of law enforcement agencies, military

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 20 of 26
3

police, INS, border patrol, DEA, ATF, etc.

• Do you think this relationship would prevent you from being fair and impartial

in this case?

8. There will be witnesses called during this trial who are members of law

enforcement and who may have been in that profession for a number of years.

• Would you give greater or lesser weight to their testimony solely because of

their employment and experience in law enforcement?

9. Have any of you or members of your family been a party or witness in any

litigation (excluding domestic relations, traffic, or probate)?

• Do you think this experience would prevent you from being fair and

impartial in this case?

10. Do any of you or any of the members of your family have any legal training?

• Do you think this training would affect your ability to be fair and impartial

in this case?

11. Have you, anyone in your family or any of your friends been the victim of any

type of sexual abuse?

12. Do you think you will have difficulty discussing the sexual nature of this case,

sexual terms or matters openly with your fellow jurors?

13. Have you, any member of your family or close personal friends ever been involved

in an investigation by law enforcement or a social service agency into alleged child

sexual abuse? If so, was there anything about that experience, such as the manner

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 21 of 26
4

in which that person was treated by law enforcement or the social service agency,

that makes you unable to serve as a fair juror in this case?

14. Would anyone on the panel refuse to convict a person of sexual abuse solely on the

testimony of a child victim?

15. You will hear evidence in this case that the victim and defendant are members of

an Indian tribe and some of the other witnesses who will testify in this case are

Indians.

• Due to any personal beliefs, opinions and/or life experiences involving

Indians that you may have had, would this fact make it difficult for you to

be a fair and impartial juror in this case?

16. This crime is alleged to have occurred on the White Mountain Apache Indian

Reservation. Do any of you feel the federal government should not be involved in

the prosecution of crimes which occur on an Indian Reservation?

17. Do any of you feel that the government has a higher burden of proof in cases

involving Indian defendants or victims because the upbringing of the victim or

defendant is different than your own?

18. Have any of you had a civil dispute, formal or informal, with any federal agency or

department, such as with the Internal Revenue Service, or the United States

Government? If so, would that dispute make it difficult for you to be a fair and

impartial juror to both the government and the defendant?

19. Do you have a belief, whether religious or philosophical, which makes it difficult

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 22 of 26
5

for you to sit in judgment of another? 

20. I will instruct you what the law is at the conclusion of the case. If selected as a

juror, you will take an oath to follow the law. Does anyone think you would have

trouble following the law even if you may disagree with it?

21. In a civil case the burden of proof is a preponderance of the evidence. This is a

criminal case in which the government must prove guilt beyond a reasonable 

doubt. Does anyone have any difficulty in holding the government to its burden?

22. Here are some fundamental principles of law:

• The fact that an indictment has been filed raises no presumption whatsoever

of the guilt of the defendant.

• The United States government must satisfy you beyond a reasonable doubt

of the guilt of the defendant.

• The defendant does not have any obligation to testify or to produce any

evidence and you may not draw an adverse inference if the defendant

chooses not to testify.

• The defendant is presumed to be innocent until his guilt is established

beyond a reasonable doubt.

• You must wait until all of the evidence has been presented before making

up your minds as to the innocence or guilt of the defendant.

• Does anyone believe that they would have any difficulty following these

principles of law?

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 23 of 26
6

23. Ladies and gentlemen, we recognize that jury service is probably an inconvenience

for you, taking you away from your jobs and families and disrupting your daily

routine. Jury service is, however, one of the most important duties that citizens of

this country can perform. For this reason, from time to time we ask citizens to

make sacrifices and serve on juries, even when inconvenient. Prospective jurors

can be excused from jury service if the length of the trial or the daily schedule

would impose undue hardship. By undue hardship I mean more than

inconvenience – I mean genuine hardship that would be experienced by you or

your family. This case is expected to last ___ days. Would the length of the trial

create an undue hardship for any of you?

24. I expect to conduct trial on these dates and times:

_______________________________________

_______________________________________

_______________________________________

_______________________________________

_______________________________________

_______________________________________

• Would this schedule create an undue hardship for any of you?

25. Do any of you have any other reason whatsoever, such as a physical difficulty, a

health problem or home problems that might interfere with your serving as a fair

and impartial juror in this case?

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 24 of 26
7

26. Some of the participants in this trial are ethnic minorities. Has anyone had any

contact or experience with ethnic minorities which would make it difficult to

render a fair and impartial verdict in this matter?

27. Ladies and Gentlemen, we have handed you a sheet with 10 separate questions. 

Please stand and answer the questions. The last question asks about your prior

jury service. With respect to civil cases, just tell us the number of civil juries on

which you have served. With respect to criminal cases, please indicate the nature

of the crime involved and the result of the case, guilty, not guilty, or hung jury, for

each of the criminal juries you have served on.

28. Did any of you know each other before this morning?

29. If there are any matters that you would rather discuss privately that may affect

your ability to be a fair and impartial juror, please let the Court know.

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 25 of 26
8

1. Juror number

2. The general location of your residence

3. Length of time at current residence

4. Education after high school, if any. State your major

5. Marital status

6. Number of children. Ages of children if under 18

7. Employment

A. Yourself – current job and types of jobs throughout lifetime

B. Spouse – current job and types of jobs throughout lifetime

8. Civil, social, fraternal, union or professional organizations. Offices held in them

9. Hobbies or recreational activities

10. Prior jury service – civil or criminal

Case 3:05-cr-00172-DGC Document 64 Filed 07/31/06 Page 26 of 26