Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Mouton v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 24, 2018No. CR–17–677Published

1ConcurrenceJohn Dan Kemp, Chief Justice

I concur with the majority's holding that the circuit court properly excluded the evidence that K.V. and E.P. had been engaged in a sexual relationship. Although I agree with the majority that the evidence could have had "a prejudicial and inflammatory effect on the proceedings," I would also hold that the girls' relationship was irrelevant.

Mouton filed a rape-shield motion, pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-42-101 (Repl. 1999) and Arkansas Rule of Evidence 411 (2017), seeking to introduce evidence of K.V.'s sexual relationship with E.P. Section 16-42-101(b) states that evidence…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. TownsendSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2006
  2. State v. CossioSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2017

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API