Opinion ID: 4471471
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: standard of review

Text: When reviewing the admission of evidence under K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 60-455(b), the court follows a three-step analysis: 'First, the trial court must determine whether the fact to be proven is material under K.S.A. [2017] Supp. 60-455(b). That is whether it relates to one of the material facts identified in that provision—motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident—or some other material fact other than propensity to commit crime. To be material the fact must have some real bearing on the decision in the case. An appellate court reviews this determination independently, without any required deference to the trial court. 'Second, the trial court must determine whether the material fact is disputed. If so, the trial court must also determine whether the evidence is probative of the disputed material fact, that is, whether it has any tendency in reason to prove the fact. An appellate court reviews this determination for an abuse of discretion. 37 'Third, the trial court must determine whether the probative value of the evidence outweighs the potential for producing undue prejudice to the defendant. An appellate court's standard for reviewing this determination is also abuse of discretion. [Citations omitted.]' State v. Barber, 302 Kan. 367, 374-75, 353 P.3d 1108 (2015). State v. Anderson, 308 Kan. 1251, 1257, 427 P.3d 847 (2018) (applying these steps in a child abuse case). See also State v. Gunby, 282 Kan. 39, 56, 144 P.3d 647 (2006) (describing the steps for analysis of 60-455 evidence).