United States v. Drak

932 F.2d 861 (10th Cir. 1991)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Drake (D) was charged with fraud on the basis that he sought financing while concealing the existence of a third-party security interest in the collateral. D testified that he had no formal training in business management and that he majored in psychology and the usual things that go along with that major and that he had a degree in psychology. D was impeached on that issue through the use of prior inconsistent statements and D admitted he did not have a degree but practiced clinical psychology at the University of Illinois and Roosevelt University in 1953-54. Later in the trial D was reexamined on the issue of his prior education and transfers between schools and it was learned and presented in court that D was actually dismissed from the University of Illinois and had done bad acts in relation to that dismissal. The actual trial transcript of the questioning is printed in Waltz 9th page 501. The evidence was let in, and D objected in that the evidence was not relevant and prejudicial and violated FRED 608(b) as the introduction of extrinsic evidence. D appealed.