Defense evidence in fraud trials
Brend v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- David Brend challenged his conviction for conspiring to commit wire fraud, arguing that the trial court let the government use evidence of other crypto schemes that turned out to be fraudulent but barred his evidence of lawful multilevel-marketing work.
- Who it affects
- The denial left the Second Circuit's judgment in place; the Supreme Court did not decide whether the evidence rulings violated Brend's rights.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court refused to hear his case (denied the petition) and did not decide his challenge.
Brend's petition raised whether evidence rules treat a defendant's evidence of other conduct the same as the government's evidence, and whether excluding his evidence denied him a fair chance to present a defense.
Question presented
1. Whether a trial court violates a criminal defendant's Fifth and Sixth Amendment right to a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense when it admits the government's other-acts evidence to prove the defendant's fraudulent intent while excluding the defendant's contemporaneous lawful conduct offered to negate the same intent. 2. Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) imposes the same standard of admissibility on a defendant who offers other-acts evidence in his defense as it imposes on the government offering such evidence against him, a question that has divided the courts of appeals.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.