Findley v. State

Gunderson J.,

dissenting:

My brother Batjer and I believe admission of the two women’s testimony was erroneous. We would remand for a proper trial.

*217In People v. Kelley, 424 P.2d 947, 956 (Cal. 1967), the California Supreme Court stated:

It is not and should not be the law, . . . that defendant’s not guilty plea places his intent in issue so that proof of sex offenses with others is always admissible. Such evidence is admissible in cases where the proof of defendant’s intent is ambiguous, as when he admits the acts and denies the necessary intent bebause of mistake or accident (citations omitted).…