Opinion ID: 1296992
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Admission of Defendant's Statement Into Evidence.

Text: On the day he was arrested the defendant admitted he was addicted to heroin and had a $70-$100 a day habit. He now claims his statement was irrelevant and immaterial to the possession of narcotics for which he was convicted. In Whitty v. State (1967), 34 Wis. 2d 278, 292, 293, 149 N. W. 2d 557, this court recognized that: . . . evidence of prior crimes is admissible when such evidence is particularly probative in showing elements of the specific crime charged, intent, identity, system of criminal activity, to impeach credibility, and to show character in cases where character is put in issue by the defendant. The admission of evidence of prior crimes for such purposes is not forbidden because such evidence would not be admissible under the general character rule. . . . It is not necessary that prior-crime evidence be in the form of a conviction; evidence of the incident, crime or occurrence is sufficient. . . . The major element of the crime for which the defendant was convicted is possession. In order to establish this element it was necessary to connect him with the apartment in which the narcotics were found. Since the defendant attempted to establish that he was not in possession,  occupancy or control of the apartment, his statement was introduced to establish his association with the drugs found therein. The test adopted in Whitty requires the trial judge to balance the relevancy of the evidence with the prejudice it will incite. In the instant case we think the relevancy outweighed any resulting prejudice to the accused. By the Court. Judgment affirmed.