IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
January 4, 2007
JOHN E. TEAGUE, PLAINTIFF,
SGT E. MAYO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, District Judge
Pending before the Court is Teague's motion in limine (Doc. 77). Specifically, Teague seeks to preclude Defendants from alluding to or presenting any evidence concerning Plaintiff's prior rape and robbery convictions. Defendants filed a response to the motion arguing that they do not intend to offer evidence of the robbery conviction, that they do not intend to offer any details regarding the first rape conviction, but that they do intend to offer evidence of the two rape convictions (Doc. 78). The Court agrees with Defendants. Based on the following, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Teague's motion.
As to the details of the first rape conviction and robbery conviction, the Court GRANTS the motion.
However, because the jury will necessary be advised that the Plaintiff was, during the time relevant to the Plaintiff's complaint, an inmate in Menard, the jury will be admonished that it necessarily means that he was convicted of a felony, but that they must not consider that in reaching their verdict on the issue of whether or not the Plaintiff has met his burden of proof to prevail against the Defendants. As to the second rape conviction, Teague has put the second rape conviction in issue himself in his original complaint (Doc. 1, p. 5). He cannot abandon it through a motion in limine. Thus, the motion is DENIED as to the second rape conviction. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiff's motion in limine (Doc. 77).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
David RHerndon United States District Judge
© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.