State v. Skillicorn

"The 'basic idea' behind that theory of relevance [the doctrine of chances] is 'the proposition that multiple instances of similar conduct are unlikely to occur accidentally." State v. Tena, 362 Or 514, 524, 412 P3d 175 (2018).

Defendant appealed a guilty verdict of unauthorized use of a vehicle and first-degree and second-degree criminal mischief.  Defendant assigned error to the trial court's decision to admit evidence of prior misconduct. On appeal, Defendant argued that the evidence was inadmissible character evidence and should have been excluded, under OEC 404 and 403, because the prior misconduct was "reckless driving" not "intentional damage." Additionally, Defendant argued the evidence was inadmissible because the prior act must "involve similar claims of accident" to be admissible under the doctrine of chances. In response, the State argued that the doctrine of chances applied to the case and proved that Defendant "intentionally damaged" the car because a string of objectively improbable actions are significantly more likely to show intentionality. "The 'basic idea' behind that theory of relevance [the doctrine of chances] is 'the proposition that multiple instances of similar conduct are unlikely to occur accidentally." State v. Tena, 362 Or 514, 524, 412 P3d 175 (2018). The Court held that the trial court did not err in balancing the probative value of the evidence against the danger of unfair prejudice because any errors were either harmless or within the court's discretion. 

Affirmed.