The following excerpt is from United States v. Christensen, 801 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2015):
We routinely trust juries to follow limiting instructions when evidence is erroneously admitted. See United States v. Mende, 43 F.3d 1298, 1302 (9th Cir.1995) (explaining that jurors are presumed to have follow[ed] the district court's limiting instructions). We similarly trust district judges to put evidence out of their minds. The granting of a motion to strike evidence in a bench trial does not routinely result in a mistrial simply because the district judge has already heard the evidence that should not have been presented. Instead, the district judge is expected to disregard the improper evidence. District judges are especially adept at reconsidering
[801 F.3d 1005]
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.