Arizona Criminal Defense Attorney Blog
When can an Arizona court admit evidence regarding a previous, seemingly unrelated offense during criminal proceedings? The answer is tricky, as there are multiple exceptions to the rule of evidence indicating that testimony about a prior bad act is inadmissible during trial. One such exception is when the evidence speaks to a party’s motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, or plan. In a recent case before the Arizona Court of Appeals, Division Two, the defendant successfully appealed his conviction by arguing that certain evidence at trial should have been admitted under this “motive” exception.
Trial Proceedings
In the case before the Arizona court, the defendant was originally charged with aggravated assault and domestic violence assault. The State charged him after his girlfriend, the victim in the case, called police officers indicating that the defendant had physically assaulted her. During the defendant’s trial, he tried to present evidence demonstrating that the victim had previously made multiple false allegations against him in an attempt to get the defendant into custody. The trial court told him he could not present this evidence, given that it was extrinsic and not relevant to the offense at issue. A jury later found the defendant guilty as charged.
Appeal
On appeal, the defendant argued the evidence should have been admitted, since it spoke to the victim’s motive in the case. The higher court agreed. Certain evidence of other crimes, said the court, may be admitted to show a person’s motive. Here, the victim’s prior fabrications could have established her intent to lie about the assault in the present case. This evidence could have made a difference in the outcome of the defendant’s case, as the jury would have been more likely to find him not guilty had it heard the evidence that was excluded.