Opinion

State v. Stewart

  • 367 Mont. 503
  • 291 P.3d 1187
  • 2012 MT 317
  • 2012 Mont. LEXIS 384
Court
Montana Supreme Court
Filed
Dec 27, 2012
Status
Published
Author
Baker
On the bench
Nelson, Cotter, Wheat, Rice, Baker
Cited by
47 cases

concluding evidence indicating a sexual abuse perpetrator’s sexual interest or relationship with a victim is “highly probative” and “not unfairly prejudicial”

How later courts described this case

  • concluding evidence indicating a sexual abuse perpetrator’s sexual interest or relationship with a victim is “highly probative” and “not unfairly prejudicial”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

JUSTICE BAKER,

concurring.

¶74 I agree that any error in the admission of the recordings of the pretext calls was harmless. I also agree that the District Court properly admitted the challenged photographs. I therefore join paragraphs 45 through 51 of the Court’s discussion of Issue One and all of its discussion with respect to Issue Two.

JUSTICE RICE joins in the concurring Opinion of JUSTICE BAKER.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.