Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Good Quote on Judges and Juries Being Able to Put Improper Evidence Out of Their Minds

United States v. Christensen, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12738 (9th Cir. July 8, 2016):

We routinely trust juries to follow limiting instructions when evidence is erroneously admitted. See United States v. Mende, 43 F.3d 1298, 1302 (9th Cir. 1995) (explaining that jurors are presumed to have "follow[ed] the district court's limiting instructions"). We similarly trust district judges to put evidence out of their minds. The granting of a motion to strike evidence in a bench trial does not routinely result in a mistrial simply because the district judge has already heard the evidence that should not have been presented. Instead, the district judge is expected to disregard the improper [*74]  evidence. District judges are especially adept at reconsidering prior decisions, as they are asked to do so all the time. See C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-18 (explaining standard for reconsideration).

Share this article:


Recent Posts