State v. Ferrero
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BERCH, Chief Justice.
¶ 1 The issue in this case is whether, in a prosecution for sexual offenses, evidence of similar sexual conduct with the same minor victim is “intrinsic evidence” that is not governed by Arizona Rule of Evidence 404(c). We also consider whether the type of evidence described in State v. Garner, 116 Ariz. 443, 569 P.2d 1341 (1977), is inherently intrinsic to the charged act. We conclude that Rule 404(c) does not apply to truly intrinsic evidence, but that Gamer evidence is not inherently intrinsic.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
¶ 2 Patrick Ferrero was charged…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- United States v. Bowie, JuanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2000
- United States v. GreenCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
- State v. RoseSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2011
- United States v. James WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990
- United States v. Rodney McLee and Vicki Murph-JacksonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2006
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by49 opinions
- State of Arizona v. Christopher Mathew PayneArizona Supreme Court · 2013
- Commonwealth v. WalkerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- People v. JacksonMichigan Supreme Court · 2015
- State of Arizona v. Shawna FordeArizona Supreme Court · 2014
- State of Arizona v. Andre Michael LeteveArizona Supreme Court · 2015
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.