Skip to main content

State v. Forbes

Citations

  • 640 A.2d 13
  • 161 Vt. 327
  • 1993 Vt. LEXIS 163

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that 404(b)’s list is not exclusive and admission of evidence establishing pattern of misconduct with daughter establishes “specifically defendant’s propensity to engage in sexual contact with his daughter as an object of his desire”
  • noting that evidence of prior history of abuse has been held admissible to establish an ongoing abusive relationship so as “to allow the victim to tell enough of the story to preserve its integrity as a credible one”
  • allowing evidence of other bad acts as context tending to overcome defendant’s categorical denial of any sexual abuse
  • allowing evidence of other bad acts as context tending to overcome defendant’s categorical denial of any sexual abuse
  • stating that “Rule 404(b) allows evidence of uncharged conduct for any purpose” other than acting in conformity with bad character and that admissible purposes listed in Rule 404(b) are “not exclusive,” as indicated by Rule’s use of phrase “such as”
  • explaining further that “[j]urors may believe that fathers ordinarily do not molest their daughters only once and that the child must not be telling the truth without evidence of a pattern”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Allen, Gibson, Dooley, Morse, Johnson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

23 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.