Court Opinion

ID: 9823466
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 09:57:51.835243+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:46:11.484601
License: Public Domain

CHRISTIANSEN, Judge
(concurring):
36 I agree with the majority that given the evidence presented in this case, the officer's statements referencing a "history of violence" did not affect the outcome of Martinez's trial. I therefore concur fully in the majority opinion.
137 However, I write separately to note that this type of evidence should generally be admissible in cases involving domestic violence. Evidence of prior domestic violence is often helpful to explain the behavior of vie-tims in the wake of a domestie-violence incident. See supra note 4. In my view, introducing this type of evidence to explain a domestie-violence victim's behavior is therefore a proper non-character purpose pursuant to rule 404(b).
1 38 Thus, so long as the trial court undertakes the serupulous examination preseribed by State v. Lucero, 2014 UT 15, 328 P.3d 841, I believe evidence of a history of violence can be properly placed before the jury.