State v. Ferrero

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting “[t]he state must prove that the defendant committed the other act” and citing State v. Terrazas, 189 Ariz. 580, 584, 944 P.2d 1194, 1198 (1997), as source of heightened standard of proof
• reversing defendant’s conviction due to improper admission of evidence of uncharged act and holding that when the State offers evidence of the defendant’s aberrant sexual propensity, “the trial court must screen it under Rule 404(c).”
• courts must grant a request to give a limiting instruction when other-act evidence has been admitted
• “[Rule] 404(b) prohibits evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts to prove the defendant’s character to act in a certain way.”
• “Henceforth, evidence is intrinsic in Arizona if it (1) directly proves the charged act, or (2) is performed contemporaneously with and directly facilitates commission of the charged act.”
• when evidence of a prior similar sex offense committed against the same child is offered to prove a defendant’s aberrant propensity to commit the charged sexual offense, “the evidence must be screened under Rule 404(c)” before it is admitted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).