Court Opinion

ID: 9552585
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 19:13:29.334568+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:28:16.504499
License: Public Domain

Justice Pro Tern JOHNSON,
CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART.
I concur in all of the Court’s opinion except part II (The Trial Court Properly Admitted Evidence of Thompson’s Prior Conviction on the Issue of Credibility), from which I respectfully dissent.
In my view, the I.C. § 19-5307 characterization is important. Otherwise, I make no sense out of the analysis of the statutes in the other states in Bush and Muraco.
Aso, in my view, the trial court did not engage in any weighing of the “fact” of the prior conviction, only its “nature.” When stripped of its nature, as the tidal court did, I think the trial court then needed to weigh the probative value against the prejudicial effect concerning the fact of conviction. As I read the record, the trial court did not do so.