Court Opinion

ID: 9668034
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 02:00:51.123451+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:42.571175
License: Public Domain

FOSHEIM, Chief Justice
(concurring in part, dissenting in part).
I concur on issues I, III, and IV. However, I am unable to conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting testimony from the decedent’s girlfriend that two nights prior to the shooting Dolcken attempted to run her over with a vehicle in the parking lot of the Westport Lounge. Therefore, I dissent on the second issue.
Evidence of this altercation does not exclusively reflect Dokken’s “bad character.” On the contrary, it may tend to establish *506another reason why Dokken feared the decedent and, hence, support his claim of self-defense. Accordingly, the trial court cannot be said to be clearly erroneous.
Further, admission of this evidence is as relevant as other prior confrontations between Dokken and members and associates of the motorcycle gang. Since the majority seeks to include all evidence “which would [aid] the jury in determining the reasonableness of Dokken’s actions under the circumstances, and the reasonableness of his apprehension of danger on the night in question[,]” we should be consistent and uphold the trial court’s decision to admit evidence of the incident between Dokken and the decedent’s girlfriend.