Right to "Plead Out" Issues and Block the Admission of Prejudicial Evidence: The Differential Treatment of Civil Litigants and the Criminal Accused as a Denial of Equal Protection

• NCJ Number: 135614
• Journal: Emory Law Journal Volume: 40 Issue: 2 Dated: (Spring 1991) Pages: 342-391
• Author(s): E J Imwinkelried
• Date Published: 1991
• Length: 50 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS.

Annotation

This article argues that criminal defendants should have the same right as civil defendants to "plead out" a special issue and thus block admission of evidence relevant only to that issue.

Abstract

In civil proceedings a defendant may admit to certain facts in the case so as to preclude the admission of any evidence to prove those facts that might be prejudicial to the defendant's case. In criminal cases, on the other hand, the defendant must plead either guilty or not guilty. If the defendant pleads not guilty, there can be no admission to any facts in the case to block the introduction of prejudicial evidence relevant only to proving those facts. The thesis of this article is that the differential treatment of the criminal defendant and the civil defendant on this matter constitutes a denial of the equal protection of the law for criminal defendants. This denial of equal protection should be ended by granting the criminally accused the same right to "plead out" facts in the case as is possessed by civil litigants. This right would enable an accused to shield the jury from highly prejudicial testimony such as evidence of an accused's uncharged crimes that may tempt the jury to decide the case on an improper basis. 302 footnotes