State v. Jones

Improper admission of prior bad acts evidence is subject to review under the "plain error" standard.

At trial, the prosecution used evidence regarding Defendant's prior abusive behavior toward a girlfriend to bolster a similar case of abuse against Defendant. Upon review, the Court asserted that Defendant had not properly preserved error pertaining to the application of the prior bad acts evidence used to convict. Defendant then petitioned review by the Supreme Court and review was granted. Relying on State v. Leistiko, the Supreme Court found that despite the unpreserved nature of Defendant's objection regarding the bad acts evidence presented at trial, the admissibility of such evidence is reviewable under the guise of "plain error" via ORAP 5.45(1). The case was remanded to this Court for review. Upon a second review, the Court found that plain error in admitting the bad acts evidence existed primarily due to a deficient jury instruction pertaining to that evidence and the inflammatory nature of the evidence itself. Thus, the Court reversed Defendant's conviction and remanded the case for further processing.