This is a cross reference. Click here to make the jump.

Cf. Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1, pin? (2006) (Court upheld the constitutionality of jury instructions placed burden on criminal defendant to establish defense of duress by a preponderance of the evidence).The government can have the burden of proof on factual issues other than the essential elements of the crime charged and the government's burden of persuasion on such "collateral" issues can be and often is less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Conversely, sometimes a criminal defendant rather than the government has the burden of proof and persuasion with respect to factual issues that arise under legal rules and requirements apart from the essential elements of the crime charged; for example, a defendant may have the burden of establishing a defense such as duress.

United States v. Nettles, 476 F.3d 508, 517 (7th Cir. 2007) (upholding trial court's admission of informant's recorded statements because they were presented and considered "to provide context to [defendant's]....The Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause places no limits on the admission at trial of nonhearsay statements made prior to or outside of trial.

Michelson v. United States, 335 U.S. 469, 475-476 (1948) (Justice Jackson sets forth the rationale thus "the state may not show defendant's prior trouble with the law, specific criminal acts, or ill name among his neighbors, even though such facts might logically be persuasive that he is by propensity a...A criminal defendant's other crimes, wrongs, or acts are inadmissible to show the defendant's propensity, or character, for the purpose of showing that the defendant committed the crime for which he or she is on trial.