United States v. Montgomery
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
390 F.3d 1013 (2004)
- Written by Arlyn Katen, JD
Facts
A federal jury convicted Valentino Montgomery (defendant) of being a felon in possession of a firearm. According to the government (plaintiff), Montgomery confessed to possessing a pistol at a Labor Day festival in 2002. However, Montgomery testified that he did not carry a pistol at the festival and that he never confessed to having a gun. The district court allowed the government to impeach Montgomery with Montgomery’s six prior felony convictions, which were for aggravated criminal sexual abuse, failure to register as a sex offender, three drug offenses, and obstruction of justice. Montgomery obstruction-of-justice conviction was for lying about his age to qualify for juvenile prosecution as an adult. Montgomery’s earliest conviction was in 1995. The district court instructed the jury twice that Montgomery’s prior convictions had been admitted solely so that the jury could assess Montgomery’s credibility. Montgomery appealed from his conviction, arguing in relevant part that the district court had abused its discretion by allowing the government to impeach Montgomery with all six of Montgomery’s prior convictions, because the sheer weight of the prior felonies prohibited Montgomery from receiving a fair trial.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wood, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
