State v. Blackwing
State v. Blackwing, 2025 UT 60 (Hagen, J.)
Criminal
The Utah Supreme Court held:
- The district court appropriately ordered the exclusion of a prior rape conviction against a co-conspirator because the risk of unfair prejudice substantially outweighs the probative value of that evidence.
- The district court exceeded its discretion in ordering the exclusion of evidence of Defendant’s previous crimes against the alleged victim and treatment of his co-conspirators because that evidence is relevant, intrinsic to the charged crime, and its probative value is not substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice.
- Practice tip: The Utah Supreme Court adopted the rule that evidence of acts that are intrinsic to a charged crime do not constitute “other act” evidence within the meaning of 404(b).
- Practice tip: The Utah Supreme Court described the “inextricably intertwined” language from State v. Lucero as “unhelpful” and clarified that it expects any relevant evidence to be “intertwined” with the charged crimes. As such, very little evidence is truly “inextricable” in the sense that it cannot be excluded from other admissible evidence.