Court Opinion

ID: 9720996
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 08:46:12.818333+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:22.721061
License: Public Domain

BAKER, Judge,
concurring.
I write separately with respect to Issue I to emphasize that the focus of the depraved sexual instinct exception is on whether the charge being prosecuted involves a depraved sexual instinct. Lehiy v. State (1986), Ind.App., 501 N.E.2d 451. Because the charge being prosecuted in the present case was child molesting, an act involving depraved sexual instinct, evidence of Crabtree’s prior criminal sexual conduct is admissible under the depraved sexual instinct exception to establish his disposition at the time he committed the crime charged. Lawrence v. State (1984), Ind., 464 N.E.2d 923; Allbritten v. State (1974), 262 Ind. 452, 317 N.E.2d 854. I agree with the majority’s determination that the evidence was not so remote as to be inadmissible.
I fully concur as to Issues II, III, and IV.