D's facilities treated and discharged wastewater, known as 'effluent.' D was required to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for each wastewater treatment facility that he operated. D was required to collect samples to ensure that effluent discharges from his facilities were within permit limits and to regularly submit the test results, called Discharge Monitoring Reports, to the LDEQ. EPA inspectors discovered violations at many of Ds' facilities. P initiated a criminal prosecution against Ds. At trial, P called Columbus L. Smith to testify regarding Ds' repeated failures to rectify overflows of raw sewage from a ditch at the Donovan Woods and Daywood Subdivision. Ds sought to impeach Smith's testimony with evidence that he was convicted in 2004 of larceny in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641. The court ruled that Appellants could not question Smith because larceny is not a 'crime of dishonesty' under Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a)(2). Ds were convicted and appealed in part on that issue.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.