Court Opinion

ID: 9713133
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:09:07.302648+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:16.480847
License: Public Domain

BAKER, Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the result reached by the majority and agree with the reasoning set forth in its opinion. Nonetheless, I would affirm the trial court's admission of the testimony in question under the depraved sexual instinet exception. As pointed out in my original dissenting opinion, evidence of prior criminal sexual conduct is admissible in prosecutions for crimes involving a depraved sexual instinct. Lehiy v. State (1986), Ind.App., 501 N.E.2d 451. The crime prosecuted in the present case was child molesting, an act involving a depraved sexual instinct. Knisley v. State (1985), Ind.App., 474 N.E.2d 513. Accordingly, the testimony was admissible under the depraved sexual instinct exception.