Opinion ID: 2366053
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Pretrial Discussion of the Misidentification Issue

Text: Just before trial on January 26, 1995, defense counsel announced that Butler would proceed on misidentification theory, I'm not going to open on . . . and I do not anticipate crossing either officer on any bias. The discussion between counsel and the trial judge then shifted to the permissible limits of the government's response to a misidentification theory. Initially the trial court indicated that the officers could recount their past arrests of Butler. When the defense expressed disagreement, the trial court considered sanitizing the officers' testimony. After reviewing cases cited by Butler's counsel, the trial court made a preliminary ruling . . . that the government is not allowed to use the introduction of [Butler's] prior arrests in opening statements or in its direct examination. When the government insisted that if the defense opened the door, it should be allowed to establish why [Butler's] known so well, the trial judge decided to defer ruling on this issue until I know what we're talking about . . . . The trial judge also said, I'm sensitive to the fact that prior arrests, can be very prejudicial. . . . Just before the jury was brought in, the trial judge stated, [the government could] go through the individual dates [of contact with Butler], . . . and that they met him and they talked with him, they saw him, they know his name, they know where he lives, whatever to indicate that they know who this individual is.