California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Tassell, 201 Cal.Rptr. 567, 36 Cal.3d 77, 679 P.2d 1 (Cal. 1984):
In view of the fact that recently adopted Proposition 8 seemingly has eliminated the barriers to admissibility of relevant "prior crimes" evidence [36 Cal.3d 97] (see Cal. Const., art. I, 28, subd. (d)), I will not devote too much effort to demonstrating the errors in the majority's analysis in this pre-Proposition 8 case. Suffice it to say that where, as here, the victim's consent to defendant's sexual acts is at issue, the fact that defendant has committed several recent and strikingly similar nonconsensual sex offenses is highly relevant to the consent issue and was properly brought to the jury's attention. (People v. Jackson (1980) 110 Cal.App.3d 560, 566, 167 Cal.Rptr. 915.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.