Court Opinion

ID: 9855223
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:21:11.381783+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:58.329369
License: Public Domain

Justice Webb
dissenting.
I dissent from the majority because I believe it was error to admit evidence of two prior sexual assaults by the defendant. I believe the only use that could be made of this evidence was to prove the defendant’s character to show he acted in conformity therewith. This is in violation of N.C.G.S. § 8C-1, Rule 404(b).
The majority quotes with approval the court’s instruction to the jury that it could consider the testimony only “to show motive, purpose, intent, opportunity to commit, and if there existed in defendant’s mind a plan, scheme, system, or design or preparation for the offense as to the charge of first-degree murder.” I do not believe evidence of previous assaults could prove any of these except by an inference that if the defendant committed the assaults he must have had these things in mind. This is what Rule 404(b) is designed to prevent.
I vote for a new trial.