Oregon Supreme Court October 18, 2012

by: Stephanie Clark • October 18, 2012 • no comments

Evidence of Prior Bad Acts Not Admissible to Show Intent Unless There's Sufficient Evidence that the Charged Act Occurred

In the absence of evidence sufficient to support a finding that the charged act occurred, similar bad acts are not admissible to show intent. Here, the defense to sex abuse was that the defendant didn't do it. Since no evidence had been presented yet, the trial court should not have denied defendant's motion in limine to exclude uncharged sexual misconduct. Instead, the court should have found the evidence admissible only on the conditions that (1) the state presents sufficient evidence at trial that the charged act occurred and (2) there be a jury instruction permitting consideration of the prior acts only after a finding that the charged act occured.

The Court also holds that prior uncharged sexual misconduct between a defendant and victim may be admissible to "bolster" a victim's identification of the defendant. Here, however, there was no need to strengthen the identification of the defendant because the victim and defendant had "continuous, ongoing contact." State v. Pitt, __ Or __ (2012).