• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTDISTRICT OF MINNESOTAYoua Vang Lee, Civil No. 07-1205 (PAM/JSM)Plaintiff,v.
MEMORANDUM
 
AND ORDER
Officer Jason Anderson andThe City of Minneapolis,Defendants.This matter is before the Court on the parties’ motions in limine. The Court willconsider the motions in turn.
A.Plaintiff’s Motions1.Gang Membership of Decedent
Plaintiff moved to suppress any evidence that the decedent, Fong Lee, was a memberof a gang. Plaintiff argues that evidence of the decedent’s membership in a gang is irrelevantand prejudicial to Plaintiff. Anderson did not know the decedent or of his alleged gangactivities. Defendants argue that the decedent’s gang membership is relevant to the issue of damages and to whether decedent had a gun the day he was shot and killed, and is admissibleto prove the decedent’s motive in running from police. Defendants also indicate that anofficer is willing to testify that the decedent’s father knew of the decedent’s gang activity,in the event that the decedent’s parents deny that they knew he was involved in gangactivities.
Case 0:07-cv-01205-PAM-JSM Document 106 Filed 05/14/09 Page 1 of 11
 
2
Evidence is relevant if it has “any tendency to make the existence of any fact that isof consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable then itwould be without the evidence.” Fed. R. Evid. 401. Relevant evidence is generallyadmissible, see Fed. R. Evid. 402, but a court may exclude otherwise relevant evidence if “itsprobative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury . . . .” Fed. R. Evid. 403.The decedent’s alleged gang membership is relevant to the issue of whether he hada gun the day he was shot because his membership in a gang makes it more probable that heor his friends had access to a gun. The decedent’s alleged gang membership, however, isirrelevant to the question of damages for wrongful death. The Court has balanced the risk of unfair prejudice with the relevance of decedent’s gang membership. See Fed. R. Evid.403. Plaintiff’s Motion is granted in part and denied in part. Defendants may introduceevidence of the decedent’s alleged gang membership for the purpose of showing thedecedent’s motive in running from police and to prove that he had the gun the day he wasshot. Defendants may not introduce evidence of the decedent’s gang membership forpurposes of calculating damages. The Court will likely sustain any objection to thetestimony by the officer that the decedent’s father knew of the decedent’s gang activity,subject to the Court revisiting the decision when and if the issue is raised at trial.
2.Prior Convictions of Decedent
Plaintiff moves to exclude any evidence that the decedent had been arrested, charged,and/or convicted of any other crime. Defendants indicated that they do not intend to
Case 0:07-cv-01205-PAM-JSM Document 106 Filed 05/14/09 Page 2 of 11
 
3
introduce such evidence, unless Plaintiff’s witnesses deny that the decedent was everarrested. This Motion is denied without prejudice.
3.Citizenship
Plaintiff moved to suppress any evidence of the decedent’s or his family members’citizenship. Defendants do not oppose the Motion. The Motion is therefore granted.
4.Collateral Sources of Special Damages
Plaintiff also moved to exclude evidence that members of decedent’s family received“collateral source benefits.” Because this evidence may become relevant to the question of damages, the Court will deny this Motion without prejudice, and will entertain appropriateobjections at trial.
5.Criminal Activity and Convictions of Decedent’s Family
Plaintiff moved to exclude any evidence that members of decedent’s family wereconvicted of any crimes. Defendants indicate that they do not have any evidence of criminalactivity or convictions of any member of the decedent’s family. However, Federal Rule of Evidence 609 expressly contemplates the use of criminal convictions to impeach witnessesunder certain circumstances. The Court will entertain appropriate objections to evidence of prior convictions as the issue arises at trial. Plaintiff’s Motion is denied.
6.Gang Membership of Witnesses
Plaintiff moved to exclude any evidence that the parties or non-party witnesses aremembers of gangs. Defendants argue that the evidence is relevant and necessary as afoundation for some witnesses’ testimony that the decedent was a member of a gang. The
Case 0:07-cv-01205-PAM-JSM Document 106 Filed 05/14/09 Page 3 of 11
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...