Case Title: State v. Ashley

Citation: 160 Vt. 125, 623 A.2d 984

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 1993-03-12T00:00:00Z

Document:
STATE_V_ASHLEY.92-180; 160 Vt. 125; 623 A.2d 984


[Filed 12-Mar-1993]

 NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P.
 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports.
 Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Vermont Supreme
 Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801 of any errors in
 order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press.


                                 No. 92-180


 State of Vermont                             Supreme Court

                                              On Appeal from
      v.                                      District Court of Vermont,
                                              Unit No. 2, Franklin Circuit

 James E. Ashley                              November Term, 1992


 Edward J. Cashman, J.

 Jo-Ann L. Gross, Franklin County Deputy State's Attorney, St. Albans,
   for plaintiff-appellee

 Robert Paolini and Charles Martin of Martin & Paolini, P.C., Barre, for
   defendant-appellant


 PRESENT:  Allen, C.J., Gibson, Dooley, Morse and Johnson, JJ.


      DOOLEY, J.   Following a jury trial, defendant appeals from a
 conviction on two counts of sexual assault, 13 V.S.A. { 3252(a)(3), and
 raises four issues.  We consider only the issues related to the admission
 of "bad acts" evidence and the impeachment of defendant's credibility
 through the introduction of prior criminal convictions, and find error in
 the latter issue.  We reverse and remand.
      The information charged defendant with two counts of sexually
 assaulting the 13-year-old daughter of the woman with whom he had lived for
 the prior seven years.  The two incidents allegedly occurred between August
 1, 1991 and September 29, 1991 and involved oral sexual contact between
 defendant and complainant.  The case was tried in February of 1992 and
 resulted in a guilty verdict on both counts.
      The first issue relates to the State's "bad act" evidence, which showed
 that the sexual assaults had begun in 1985, when the complainant was seven
 years old, and continued until 1991.  The evidence described the similarity
 of most of the incidents, as well as defendant's instruction that the
 complainant not disclose the abuse.  Defendant argues that the evidence
 should have been excluded under V.R.E. 404(b) as propensity evidence.  We
 have held in similar cases that evidence of prior acts is admissible for
 non-propensity purposes.  See State v. Cardinal, 155 Vt. 411, 414, 584 A.2d 1152, 1154-55 (1990) (victim's state of mind in not disclosing the sexual
 abuse and defendant's modus operandi); State v. Parker, 149 Vt. 393, 399,