When a rapper's bars help put them behind bars.

I'm a bit of an evidence nerd, so it's a low bar for me to find evidentiary issues interesting. And speaking of bars, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals just handed down its decision affirming the conviction of a rapper named Bankroll Freddie on drug and firearm charges.

On appeal, among other things, Freddie challenged the admission of his own rap lyrics into evidence. The trial court allowed four short clips from longer videos of Freddie's performances. Each clip was under 13 seconds.

In this case, Freddie argued that the evidence should have been excluded as unfairly prejudicial under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 ("The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.").

The Eighth Circuit disagreed. According to the opinion, the lyrics were limited to those that showed Freddie's understanding of words he used in conversations obtained by wiretap related to the charges brought against him (e.g., "glock" and "switch").

While finding no abuse of discretion in this case, the Court expressed some caution with the introduction of lyrics in future cases: "We recognize that some lyrics, rap included, may be prejudicial--sometimes unfairly so. . .But here, the lyrics introduced into evidence were limited to specific lyrics that included words relevant to the charged offenses. No full songs were introduced, and [Freddie] points to no irrelevant or inflammatory lyrics that were included in the clips."

Freddie also raised a possible First Amendment violation, but the Court summarily disposed of that issue in a footnote: "Gladney also argues that the use of his rap lyrics as evidence against him at trial violated his First Amendment rights. But '[t]he First Amendment [] does not prohibit the evidentiary use of speech to establish the elements of a crime or to prove motive or intent.' Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476, 487–89 (1993)."

Future rappers (and maybe also Future) take notes.