Court of Appeals of Oregon· 6/21/2000

State v. Wilhelm

Citations

3 P.3d 715
168 Or. App. 489
2000 Ore. App. LEXIS 989

How courts have described this case

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

holding evidence of intent to arouse or gratify sexual desire is relevant where it is an element of the crime charged
holding evidence of intent to arouse or gratify sexual desire is relevant where it is an element of the crime charged
“romantic,” “very intimate” letters from adult defendant to 13-year-old complainant were relevant and admissible “to demonstrate fthe defendant’s! sexual predisposition for this particular victim”
“romantic,” “very intimate” letters from adult defendant to 13-year-old complainant were relevant and admissible “to demonstrate [the defendant’s] sexual predisposition for this particular victim”
“When * * * no unfair prejudice results from the evidence’s admission, the trial court ha[s] no discretion to exclude it.”
“In this case, the jury could infer from defendant’s letters that he had a romantic relationship with the victim. But that inference is precisely why the letters are probative. Any prejudice that may result from the letters is not ‘unfair prejudice,’ as the court has explained the concept.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Edmonds, Armstrong, Kistler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.