State v. Donald

¶1 As a matter of apparent first impression, we consider whether the exclusion of evidence of any person’s other crimes, wrongs, or acts to show that he acted consistently with his character on a particular occasion, as required by ER 404(b), violates an accused’s constitutional right to present a defense. Because ER 404(b) is neither arbitrary nor unreasonably related or disproportionate to the ends it is designed to serve, we reject the constitutional challenge to it.

¶2 Harold Donald appeals his convictions for first degree assault and attempted robbery. At trial, Donald argued that an…