State v. Formby-Carter

“Evidence of defendant’s previous criminal convictions and the underlying facts was relevant and admissible to prove ‘defendant’s mental state, as well as * * * absence of mistake or accident.’” State v. Johns, 301 Or 535, 725 P2d 312 (1986); OEC 404(3).

Defendant appealed his judgment of conviction for Assault in the Third Degree. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s admission of evidence of his prior convictions to prove he acted with intent, or in the absence of mistake or accident, when he assaulted the same victim on prior occasions. On appeal, Defendant argued that the previous convictions were not relevant, and even if they were minimally relevant, the risk of unfair prejudice outweighed the probative value. In response, the State argued that under OEC 404(3), the previous convictions and their underlying facts were relevant given the similarity of those facts to this case. “Evidence of defendant’s previous criminal convictions and the underlying facts was relevant and admissible to prove ‘defendant’s mental state, as well as * * * absence of mistake or accident.’” State v. Johns, 301 Or 535, 725 P2d 312 (1986); OEC 404(3). The Court found that the jury would have been aware of the facts of the previous convictions regardless of any error in admitting the evidence because Defendant produced character witnesses that were subject to cross-examination of those facts.  Thus, the Court held that, even if the trial court erred in admitting evidence of Defendant’s previous convictions and those facts to prove intent, or in the absence of mistake or accident, the error was harmless.  Affirmed.