Court Opinion

ID: 9530276
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:58:49.521353+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:03.731612
License: Public Domain

BURKE, Justice,
dissenting in part.
I believe the evidence of Oksoktaruk’s commission of a prior burglary was admissible to show that he entered Kelly’s Photo Lab with the intent to steal, given the details of the earlier burglary. Thus, I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the superior court committed reversible error when it allowed the state to introduce that evidence. The court carefully weighed its probative value against its prejudicial effect and concluded that the evidence should be admitted, if accompanied by a limiting instruction, that was later given, allowing the jury to consider it only for the purpose of determining whether the accused acted wilfully and with the specific intent to steal. In light of the other evidence in the case, I am unable to say that the court erred in reaching that conclusion.