Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Joslin

Court of Appeals of Idaho

October 8, 2019

STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
Billy Lee JOSLIN, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.

          Petition for Rehearing Denied: February 24, 2020

Page 173

          Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, State of Idaho, Kootenai County. Hon. Cynthia K.C. Meyer, District Judge.

         Judgment of conviction for rape and attempted strangulation, affirmed .

          Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Maya P. Waldron, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Maya P. Waldron argued.

         Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. Jeff D. Nye argued.

         OPINION

         HUSKEY, Judge

         Billy Lee Joslin, Jr. appeals from his judgment of conviction entered upon the jury verdict finding him guilty of rape and attempted strangulation. On appeal, Joslin argues the district court erred when it allowed Joslin’s ex-wife to testify. Specifically, Joslin claims the district court abused its discretion when it found the ex-wife’s testimony was admissible under Idaho Rule of Evidence 404(b). To the extent the district court erred in admitting the testimony from Joslin’s ex-wife, any such error was harmless and we affirm the district court’s judgment of conviction.

          I.

          FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         The State charged Joslin by information with rape, Idaho Code § 18-6101, and attempted strangulation, I.C. § 18-923.[1] The State also charged Joslin with being a persistent violator, I. C. § 19-2514.

         The State filed a motion in limine, pursuant to Rule 404(b), seeking to admit evidence that in 2006 Joslin entered the home of his ex-wife, strangled her until she was unconscious, and raped her. In its brief in support of the motion in limine, the State argued the evidence of Joslin’s prior conduct was admissible because it was part of a common plan

Page 174

and because it was relevant for purposes of disproving consent. Joslin objected to the State’s intent to use ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.