State v. Thomas

I. INTRODUCTION

Nathan M. Thomas appeals, challenging one of his two convictions by a jury-for electronically offering to perform oral sex upon a police decoy portraying a 14-year-old girl. 1 He first claims that "[rule] 404 evidence" 2 of a sexually explicit online "chat" with another underage woman was admitted for improper purposes and was unfairly prejudicial. We conclude that both bases, motive and absence of mistake or accident, were proper. We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in balancing probity and prejudice. Second, Thomas asserts that his…