Rule 609: Impeachment by Evidence of a Criminal Conviction

For a witness other than the accused in a criminal case, evidence of a conviction for a crime punishable by death or imprisonment for more than one year must be admitted, subject to Rule 403. For the accused in a criminal case, such evidence must be admitted if the probative value outweighs the prejudicial effect to the accused. For any witness, evidence of a conviction for a crime that required proving (or the witness admitting) a dishonest act or false statement must be admitted regardless of punishment. Evidence of a conviction is not admissible if more than 10 years have passed since the conviction or release from confinement (whichever is later), unless the probative value substantially outweighs the prejudicial effect and the proponent gives reasonable written notice. A conviction that has been the subject of a pardon, annulment, or equivalent procedure is generally not admissible. Juvenile adjudications are generally not admissible except in limited circumstances.

• 1Crimen falsi (dishonesty/false statement crimes) — must be admitted regardless of punishment; no balancing
• 2Felonies for ordinary witnesses — admissible subject to Rule 403 balancing
• 3Felonies for criminal defendants — admissible only if probative value outweighs prejudicial effect (defendant-protective standard)
• 410-year time limit — older convictions presumptively inadmissible; requires advance notice and 'substantially outweighs' showing
• 5Pardons, annulments, and juvenile adjudications have special restrictive rules

• Identifying whether a crime is one of 'dishonesty or false statement' (crimen falsi) — perjury, fraud qualify; robbery, drug dealing generally do not
• Applying the different balancing standards: 403 for ordinary witnesses vs. the reversed standard for criminal defendants
• The 10-year time limit calculation and when old convictions can still come in
• Whether the defendant testifying opens the door to conviction evidence they wanted to keep out