Court Opinion

ID: 9512539
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:16:10.734088+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:05:25.594324
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE RICE,
concurring.
¶51 I concur with the Court’s decision. I don’t agree that evidence of cutting is necessarily, as a matter of law, character evidence admissible only as permitted under M. R. Evid. 404, or that it is irrelevant as a matter of law to the charge of assault, as the Court indicates in ¶ 30 (“Under the facts of this case, the reason Couture had the knife in her possession was not relevant. She could have been cutting herself or slicing a salami.”). Hauer makes no showing of the particular relevance to his defense of the cutting evidence, or of his surprise discovery of this activity. He offers generally that the circumstances surrounding the incident must be examined, and offers the speculative assertion that “Ms. Couture using the knife to harm herself clearly suggests that she was willing to use the knife as a weapon.” Without a more definitive connection, however, I believe the evidence, though relevant, was well excludable as substantially outweighed by the danger of confusing and misleading the jury under M. R. Evid. 403, even if Hauer had given the District Court a timely opportunity to consider it.