Court Opinion

ID: 9788902
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 01:21:54.337131+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:17.347298
License: Public Domain

Maupin, C. J.,
with whom Young, J., agrees,
concurring:
I agree that the judgments of conviction in this matter should be affirmed.
I disagree, however, that this court should overturn Findley v. State1 and McMichael v. State2 as authority for the proposition that evidence showing that an accused poses a propensity for sexual aberration may be relevant in prosecutions for sexual assault. In this, I believe that both cases formulate a rule that is consistent with the exceptions to the general rule of non-admissibility of “other crimes, wrongs or acts” under NRS 48.045(2) as proof of character.

 19 Nev. 212, 214, 577 P.2d 867, 868 (1978).

 94 Nev. 184, 188, 577 P.2d 398, 401 (1978), overruled on other grounds by Meador v. State, 101 Nev. 765, 711 P.2d 852 (1985).