NO. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS			§	IN THE ____________ COURT
						§

V.						§	OF
						§
JOHN DOE					§	____________COUNTY, TEXAS

MOTION IN LIMINE

COMES NOW, ,JOHN DOE Defendant in the above styled and numbered cause, and moves the Court to order the State not to refer to or offer any evidence or testimony regarding the following matters until the Court has conducted a hearing outside the presence of the jury and has had an opportunity to rule on the admissibility of said evidence or testimony:
I.
	That before the complaining witness, _____________, gives any testimony in the presence of the jury, the State be required to properly establish that any testimony regarding _______________’s recollection or memory of any offenses allegedly committed by Defendant is both reliable and relevant with respect to the alleged offenses.
	The Texas Supreme Court has held that “recovered” memories are inherently unreliable and not generally accepted as valid in the scientific community.  S.V. v. R.V., 933 S.W.2d 1 (Tex. 1996).  Therefore, as evidence has been previously presented to the Court that the memories or recollections of the witness ___________ may be “recovered” memories, the State should not be permitted to present evidence or testimony of said memories or recollections unless the Court determines that said evidence or testimony is both reliable and relevant, and therefore admissible.
II.
	That before any witness gives testimony linking any medical conditions of _________________ to any allegations of sexual abuse, a hearing be held outside the presence of the jury, and that at that time the State be required to present some credible evidence establishing a relationship between said medical conditions and any alleged sexual abuse, or between said medical conditions and any prior medical conditions alleged to have arisen due to sexual abuse, as well as credible evidence establishing the existence of any such prior medical conditions.
III.
	The Defendant is aware of several statements of the Defendant that the State may attempt to introduce as evidence at the trial.  Each of these statements contains information concerning extraneous matters which would fall under Rule 404(b) of the Texas Rules of Evidence, and under Rule 403 of the Texas Rules of Evidence, said matters would be highly prejudicial to Defendant and otherwise inadmissible at trial.  For example, Defendant’s statement to Detective Heather Drennan contains information that Defendant performed oral sex on a man at an adult movie theater.  Therefore, Defendant would respectfully request that, before any alleged statement or confession of the Defendant be proffered or entered into evidence, a hearing be held outside the presence of the jury to determine the admissibility of the alleged statement or confession, or any part or portion thereof.

IV.
	That before any witness gives testimony regarding any allegations that Defendant physically abused any person, a hearing be held outside the presence of the jury to determine the admissibility of said testimony, in accordance with Rule 404(b) of the Texas Rules of Evidence and Article 37.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. 
V.
	That before any witness gives testimony in the presence of the jury regarding evidence of any extraneous bad acts on the part of the Defendant, other than the specific offenses alleged, a hearing be held outside the presence of the jury to determine the admissibility of said testimony, in accordance with Rule 404(b) of the Texas Rules of Evidence and Article 37.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
	In support of said motion, Defendant would respectfully show the Court the following:
1)	Said testimony would be highly prejudicial to Defendant;

2)	If admissibility is not determined prior to the giving of said testimony, and said testimony is subsequently determined to be inadmissible, Defendant would be caused irreparable harm, and said harm could not be remedied by any curative instruction;

3)	Defendant has a statutorily protected right to have only relevant, legally admissible evidence proffered in the prosecution against him;

4)	Defendant has a constitutionally protected right to a fair trial, and a fair 
	trial cannot be had unless the State be required to show that said testimony is admissible prior to its entry into evidence; and

5)	Defendant will be effectively denied his right to a fair trial unless the admissibility of said testimony be determined outside of the presence of the jury, as said testimony would be highly inflammatory and prejudicial, due to the nature of the allegations against Defendant.

	WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant prays that prior to going into any of the foregoing, the District Attorney and any member of his staff and any witnesses in behalf of the State, be instructed not to allude to such evidence until first 
approaching the bench and making it known to the Court that it is the intention to go into such matters, outside the presence and hearing of the jury and that the District Attorney intends to offer such proof, thus permitting the jury to be retired and the evidence and objections heard and the Court being given an opportunity to rule on the admissibility of the evidence before it is placed before the jury, thus preventing prejudicial error in such cause, an error which no instruction could cure.
Respectfully submitted,

By:                                                     

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

	On _________, 200__, a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Motion in Limine  was hand-delivered or mailed, postage prepaid, to the District Attorney of__________ County, Texas.