Court Opinion

ID: 9739828
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:21:49.823275+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:14.191623
License: Public Domain

Krivosha, C. J.,
concurring.
I concur in the results reached by the majority in this case. I write separately, however, because I believe that part of the rationale upon which the majority bases its decision is not correct. Specifically, I refer to that portion of the majority’s opinion in which it states that “[ejvidence of the completed crime in the Spaghetti Works case would have been admissible in the Jerico’s cases to show method of operation and identity.” For reasons more particularly set out in my dissent in State v. Ellis, 208 Neb. 379, 303 N.W.2d 741 (1981), I do not believe that evidence of the sexual attack in the Spaghetti Works case could have been admissible to show either operation or identity in the *519Jerico’s robbery, and could only have been introduced by the State for the purpose of showing that McGuire acted in conformity with his character to commit a crime, contrary to the provisions of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-404(2) (Reissue 1979). I believe that we continue to improperly extend this rule to the point that we have virtually repealed the statute.