Opinion ID: 156216
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The 403 Balancing Test

Text: 6 Mr. Mann argues that the district court erred in refusing to exclude the Rule 414 testimony under Rule 403. We review a district court's application of Rule 403 for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Guardia, 135 F.3d 1326, 1998 WL 37575, at  2 (10th Cir.1998). Rule 403 allows the court to exclude evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by dangers such as unfair prejudice or confusion of the issues. Fed.R.Evid. 403. The Rule 403 balancing test applies to all evidence admitted under Rule 414. See United States v. Meachum, 115 F.3d 1488, 1492 (10th Cir.1997). Because of the unique nature of character evidence, it is important that the trial court 'make a reasoned, recorded' statement of its 403 decision when it admits evidence under Rules 413-415. Castillo, --- F.3d at ---- (quoting Guardia, 1998 WL 37575, at  8, 135 F.3d at ----). 7 Here, the trial court listened to the defense argument regarding Rule 403 and stated, I'm going to admit the proffered testimony under Rule 414. Tr. Vol. II at 21. Without any reasoned elaboration by the district court we have no way of understanding the basis of [this] decision.... Instead, we require an on the record decision by the court explaining its reasoning in detail. United States v. Roberts, 88 F.3d 872, 882 (10th Cir.1996). We therefore remand this case to the district court for further explanation of its 403 ruling.