People v. Jones
2011 Colo. App. LEXIS 1402
Colo. Ct. App.2011Background
- J.R. reported a sexual assault to emergency personnel; SANE exam found a minor genital tear with possible consensual interpretation
- DNA from forensic evidence matched defendant Michael Lee Jones; charges included sexual assault and unlawful sexual contact
- J.R. died before trial; evidentiary disputes about admitting her emergency dispatch tape and statements to medical personnel
- District court held emergency tape and J.R.'s statements to SANE nurse testimonial (inadmissible) but allowed SANE nurse testimony about examination; J.R.'s statements to triage nurse/doctor deemed admissible non-testimonial
- People moved to admit CRE 404(b) evidence of two other alleged assaults to show common plan/design or rebut consent; district court admitted, over defense objection
- After five-day trial, jury convicted Jones; district court sentenced him to 24 years to life for sexual assault and 12 years for unlawful sexual contact, to be served concurrently with 20 years mandatory parole
- The Court reverses and remands for a new trial on the CRE 404(b) error; other issues discussed but not dispositive to the outcome
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of other acts under CRE 404(b) | People contend prior assaults show common plan/method and rebut consent | Jones argues prior acts are too dissimilar and lack probative value independent of character | Abuse; not sufficiently similar; reversible error for lack of independent relevance |
| Confrontation Clause impact of testimonial statements | State seeks to admit officers' and medical personnel's statements | Jones relies on confrontation clause; J.R. did not testify | Some statements non-testimonial or not hearsay; others fail to implicate clause; not outcome-determinative due to reversal on other grounds |
| Recusal of judge | Contempt citation raises recusal concerns | Recusal should have been considered | Not reached; reversed on other grounds; recusal issue left unresolved |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Snyder, 874 P.2d 1076 (Colo. 1994) (Rule 404(b) admissibility framework for other acts)
- People v. Spoto, 795 P.2d 1314 (Colo. 1990) (Judicially required admissibility analysis for 404(b) evidence)
- Yusem v. People, 210 P.3d 458 (Colo. App. 2009) (Harmless error and necessity of 404(b) balancing)
- People v. Rath, 44 P.3d 1033 (Colo. 2002) (Doctrine of chances; requisite similarity and purpose-based relevance)
- Delgado v. People, 890 P.2d 141 (Colo. App. 1994) (Probability-based relevance; limits on similarity for 404(b))
- State v. Lough, 889 P.2d 487 (Wash. 1995) (Common plan/design requires distinctive features beyond general similarities)
- McKibben v. People, 862 P.2d 991 (Colo. App. 1998) (Prior acts to rebut consent must show a compelling pattern and similarity)
- Vigil v. People, 127 P.3d 916 (Colo. 2006) (Testimonial/non-testimonial determinations of statements to medical personnel)