Cited by

I Evidence of other bad acts, also known as Spreigl evidence, is “generally not admissible to prove the defendant’s character for committing crimes.” (); see also Minn. R. Evid.

404(b); (holding that when the state seeks to introduce evidence of a defendant’s other crimes or bad acts, the state must provide written notice to the defendant within a reasonable time before trial).

A district court may exclude such evidence despite its probative value because of the risk that a jury will convict the defendant based on their prior bad acts, “though guilt of the crime charged is not proved.” (quotation omitted).

Evidence of other crimes or bad acts is known in Minnesota as “Spreigl evidence.” ().

Spreigl evidence is evidence of a prior bad act and “ is generally not admissible to prove the defendant ’s character for committing crimes, but it can be admitted to show motive, intent, absence of mistake, identity, or a common scheme or plan.” State v. Gomez , ( (Mi nn.

to prepare her for trial, she made statements 1 In Minnesota, evidence of other crimes or bad acts is known as “Spreigl evidence.” ().

2 (discussing the parameters of reverse-Spreigl evidence).

Here, the state was required 2

404(b)(1); (referring to evidence of other crimes or bad acts as “Spreigl evidence,” ).

The district court ruled that evidence of Schober’s prior out-of- 1 Evidence of other crimes is known in Minnesota as “Spreigl evidence.” ().

Evidence offered under one of the rule 404(b) exceptions is commonly referred to as “Spreigl evidence.” ().

(allowing the admission of evidence of other crimes to prove motive, intent, absence of mistake, identity, or common scheme or plan).

If a n appellate court determines that a district court abused its discretion by admitting Spreigl evidence, it must 1

404(b) and the state argued that the evidence was admissible under the intrinsic- evidence exception.

Evidence of prior crimes or wrongdoing is often called “Spreigl evidence.” ().

Geraci argues that the admission of that evidence is contrary to rule 404(b)

(citing State v. Spreigl, 5 ).

In addition, the state presented Spreigl evidence of a 2020 incident of alleged criminal sexual conduct by Younis, 1 which was generally 1 Evidence of other crimes or bad acts is known in Minnesota as “Spreigl evidence.” ().

404(b)(1); d 167, 169 (Minn. 1965) .

1 the prosecutor must give notice in writing, prior to trial, of all other crimes the prosecutor intends to show that an accused had previously committed.

In the call, Buchan said, “I got artillery,” and “I got a whole 7 This term comes from State v. Spreigl , see also Minn. R. Evid.

(stating that rule 404(b) “sets forth the requirements for admissibility of Spreigl evidence”); (acknowledging the dangers inherent in evidence of prior offenses).

8 Evidence of other crimes or bad acts is known in Minnesota as “Spreigl evidence.” ().

The state also called Kern Pieh, whose testimony focused on her experience working with sexual-abuse victims, including her work with CornerHouse, a child-advocacy center 1 Evidence of other crimes or bad acts is known in Minnesota as “Spreigl evidence.” ().

Evidence of other crimes or bad acts is known in Minnesota as “Spreigl evidence.” ().

(requiring the state to submit notice of intent to offer evidence of prior crimes at trial).