Legal Opinion · Dissent

Walden v. State (Ex parte Walden)

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 30, 2017No. 1160233Published

1Dissent

MURDOCK, Justice (dissenting).

I respectfully dissent, and I join Justice Bryan's dissent.

To be admissible under Rule 404(b), Ala. R. Evid., evidence of a prior bad act must go to one of the issues prescribed in the second sentence of that rule, i.e., "motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident." But that alone is not enough. The prescribed Rule 404(b) issue to which the prior-acts evidence is relevant must actually be "at issue" in the present case. As Justice Bryan notes in his dissent, the fact of the prior bad act must be…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. Garcia-RosaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
  2. United States v. John Alonso Ramirez, and Zeir MarulandaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
  3. United States v. Alejandro Rubio-EstradaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
  4. Rivera-Feliciano v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  5. United States v. Gregory NearyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API