Court Opinion

ID: 9539818
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:10:42.177872+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:59:22.807326
License: Public Domain

ZIMMERMAN, Justice
(concurring in the result).
I concur in the result reached by Justice Howe’s opinion, and specifically in its recognition that when prior crime evidence unrelated to the conduct out of which the charges in the case before the court arose is made an element of the charged crime by the legislature, a majority of this Court requires that the trial be bifurcated to avoid the introduction of such unrelated prior crimes evidence before the defendant’s guilt on the underlying charge is determined. I write separately only to note my continued adherence to the views expressed in my separate opinion in State v. Bishop, 753 P.2d 439, 494-99 (Utah 1988), which were joined in whole by Justice Durham and in part by Justice Stewart, see State v. Gardner, — P.2d-, -(Jan. 31, 1989) (separate opinions of Stewart, J., and Zimmerman, J.).
DURHAM, J., concurs in the concurring opinion of ZIMMERMAN, J.