Summary of Luce v. United States, 469 U.S. 38 (1984)
Facts: ∆ was indicted on charges of conspiracy and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. ∆ filed a in liminemotion to prohibit the prosecutor from bringing in the prior drug conviction of ∆ in order to impeach him if he decides to testify. ∆ did not make any commitment to testify. The trial judge denied the motion.
Issue: May a ∆ seek appellate review of claim of improper impeachment if he has not testified during trial?
Rationale: Under the balancing test applied under FRE 609(a)(1), an appellate court handicapped in any effort to rule on subtle evidentiary questions outside a factual context. To perform this balancing, the court must know the precise nature of the ∆’s testimony, which is unknowable when, as here, the ∆ does not testify. So in order to reserve appellate review, ∆ must testify.