United States v. Beechum

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978 · Evidence

582 F.2d 898 (1978)

Updated August 1, 2026

Evidenceextrinsic offense evidenceFRE 404(b)FRE 403FRE 104(b)FRE 401FRE 611(b)intent

Facts

Postal inspectors planted a test letter containing an 1890 silver dollar and currency in a mailbox on Beechum's route after suspecting him of rifling mail. After Beechum retrieved the mail, the letter was found opened and resealed and the silver dollar was missing; inspectors later found the silver dollar in Beechum's hip pocket and two unsigned Sears credit cards issued to other persons in his wallet. The government introduced evidence that the cards had been mailed about ten months earlier to addresses on routes Beechum had serviced. Beechum testified that he found the silver dollar innocently and intended to turn it in to his supervisor, making intent the central disputed issue.

Issue

Whether the district court properly admitted the Sears credit cards and related proof as extrinsic offense evidence to show Beechum's intent to possess the silver dollar unlawfully. The case also raised whether the government could question Beechum about the cards on cross-examination and whether his repeated invocation of the Fifth Amendment created reversible prejudice.

Rule

Under Rule 404(b), extrinsic offense evidence is admissible through a two-step analysis: first, the evidence must be relevant to an issue other than the defendant's character; second, under Rule 403, its probative value must not be substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice or other Rule 403 concerns. When relevance depends on whether the defendant committed the extrinsic act, Rule 104(b) governs: the trial judge asks only whether there is sufficient evidence for the jury reasonably to find that the defendant committed the extrinsic offense. For intent, relevancy turns on whether the extrinsic act and charged offense involve the same significant state of mind, not on identity of physical elements, and Broadway's stricter requirements are overruled.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Phoenix, Nora Valdez is tried for knowingly retaining a misdelivered parcel containing a vintage bracelet. She testifies that she planned to take the bracelet to her apartment manager the next morning, and the prosecution offers evidence that when she was arrested that same evening, she was carrying a neighbor's unsigned transit-benefit card and had lied that all cards in her purse were her own.

Is the transit-card evidence admissible to prove Nora's intent regarding the bracelet?

Explanation. Under the majority's two-step Rule 404(b) analysis, extrinsic-act evidence is admissible if it is relevant to an issue other than character and then survives Rule 403 balancing. For intent, relevance turns on whether the extrinsic act and charged act reflect the same significant state of mind, not identical physical elements. Nora's possession of another person's unsigned card, coupled with her false denial, tends to make her claimed innocent intent about the bracelet less believable.