Craigg v. State, 2012 Ark. 387

Background

Anthony Craigg was convicted of rape and sentenced to life in prison without parole following a jury trial in Washington County.
Craigg challenged the admissibility of a prior Oklahoma lewd-molestation conviction under Arkansas Rule of Evidence 404(b).
The State charged Craigg with rape and later sought a habitual-offender enhancement; the failure-to-register count was dropped.
A pretrial hearing determined the prior conviction would be admissible under the pedophile exception to Rule 404(b) to show depraved sexual instinct, motive, and plan.
At trial, the State introduced certified copies of Craigg’s 1998 Oklahoma judgment; Craigg preserved objections to the pedophile exception throughout, but the court admitted the evidence.
During the penalty phase, testimony referenced Craigg’s prior conviction; Craigg challenged the evidentiary basis for admitting the conviction but the court affirmed admission and the jury imposed life without parole.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the pedophile exception to Rule 404(b) applies	State contends prior conviction shows depraved sexual instinct and helps prove plan/motive.	Craigg argues the pedophile exception does not apply due to dissimilarity and lack of intimate relationship.	Pedophile exception affirmed; prior conviction admissible to show depraved instinct and propensity.
Whether the prior acts were sufficiently similar and connected to the charged crime	Similarities exist: both victims were minors, acts followed by admonition not to tell, and both involved oral sex.	The acts are dissimilar in age, setting, and timing, undermining relevance.	Court found sufficient similarity and proximity to support admissibility.
Whether there was adequate evidence of an intimate relationship between Craigg and the victims	Relationship close in acquaintance or care-taking context shown in both cases.	No intimate relationship established with either victim.	Sufficient intimate relationship shown; relationship is close enough for pedophile exception.
Whether the trial court improvidently admitted the prior conviction given its age	Age of prior acts does not defeat relevance; probative value remains.	Remote 17-year gap undermines probative value.	Temporal proximity deemed sufficiently close; admission not abuse of discretion.
Whether Craigg properly preserved the argument concerning lack of factual details accompanying the conviction	Details were not required if pedophile exception applies; the judgment alone is admissible.	Details should have been excluded or challenged.	Issue not preserved for review due to lack of timely objection at the appropriate stage.

Key Cases Cited

Lamb v. State, 372 Ark. 277 (2008) (temporal proximity; probative value of prior acts with minors)
Nelson v. State, 365 Ark. 314 (2006) (reasonableness of relevance over time)
Efird v. State, 102 Ark. App. 110 (2008) (limitation of likening adolescent/incest acts to later crimes)
Parish v. State, 357 Ark. 260 (2004) (intimate relationship standards for pedophile exception)
Allen v. State, 374 Ark. 309 (2008) (pedophile exception framework and relevance)
Hamm v. State, 365 Ark. 647 (2006) (Rule 404(b) exceptions; independent relevance)