Evidence that Defendant and Minor to Whom He Sent Allegedly Obscene Letter Was Admissible

US v. Miller: Miller was incarcerated for state charges when he sent a sexually-themed letter to his sister, who was 14 years old. As a result, he was charged with transferring obscene matter to a minor. Prior to trial, Miller indicated that the only issue for the jury would be whether the letter was actually obscene and offered to stipulate to all other necessary facts, including that Miller knew he sent the letter to a minor. Over the Government’s objection, the district court held that any evidence of Miller’s relationship with the minor should be excluded under Rules 404(b) and 403 of the Rules of Evidence.

On the Government’s interlocutory appeal, the Fourth Circuit reversed the district court, finding that it had plainly abused its discretion in excluding the evidence. The court noted that generally the Government cannot be forced to stipulate to facts at trial and is entitled to present its case with “narrative integrity.” With that background, the court concluded that the evidence that Miller and the recipient of the letter was relevant both to the elements of Miller’s knowledge that she was a minor (more particularly how he knew that) and to the issue of whether the letter was obscene. While the analysis of obscenity is limited to the work in question itself, the court concluded that in “the specific circumstances of this case . . . the ‘whole’ necessarily includes Miller’s relationship to the recipient.” The court also concluded that the evidence was not more prejudicial than probative and was admissible under Rule 403.