State v. Ashby, 357 P.3d 554

Child (born 2002) alleged that between 2009–2010 his caregiver Caroline Ashby engaged in repeated sexual abuse (bathing nude, touching, and instructing the child to touch her). Ashby was charged with two counts of aggravated sexual abuse of a child.
A recorded forensic interview (CJC interview) in which Child described abuse was played at trial and admitted into evidence; Child also testified at trial via closed-circuit video.
Ashby sought to admit evidence under Utah R. Evid. 412 of six prior incidents in which Child engaged in sexual behavior with other children (five involving boys; one a girl) to impeach Child, rebut a "sexual innocence" inference, and show missed earlier opportunities to report.
The trial court excluded the Rule 412 evidence (except conduct involving Ashby) after finding it marginally probative and likely to cause embarrassment/confusion, and alternatively excluded it under Rule 403 as substantially more prejudicial than probative.
The CJC interview DVD was admitted into evidence; the court allowed exhibits to go into the jury room but the record does not show a DVD player was provided or that jurors actually viewed the DVD during deliberations.
Jury convicted Ashby on both counts; she appealed arguing (1) exclusion of Rule 412 evidence violated her confrontation/defense rights, and (2) allowing the DVD into deliberations was error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Ashby)	Held
Admissibility of Victim's other sexual behavior under Utah R. Evid. 412	Exclusion proper to protect child, avoid confusion and prejudice; Rule 412 purposes outweigh low probative value	Needed to rebut sexual-innocence inference, impeach Child, and show opportunities to disclose earlier; constitutional right to confront/witness	Affirmed: evidence relevant but exclusion under Rule 412 and alternatively Rule 403 was within trial court discretion
Use of prior statements (CJC interview) at trial	CJC interview admissible under Crim. P. 15.5 and Evid. R. 801 as prior inconsistent statement	Objected to play of DVD for lack of good cause and potential prejudice	Trial court correctly admitted DVD at trial; admission of the exhibit upheld
Jury taking the CJC interview DVD into deliberations	Exhibits received into evidence may go to jury under Crim. P. 17(l)	Allowing DVD into deliberations would overweight the interview and harm Ashby's defense	Court assumed harmless: record contains no indication jurors actually viewed the DVD during deliberations, so any error was nonprejudicial
Application of Rule 403 balancing to Rule 412 evidence	Probative value did not outweigh risk of unfair prejudice/confusion	Probative value important to constitutional rights; danger of prejudice overstated	Affirms trial court’s Rule 403 balancing and exclusion as within discretion

State v. Marks, 262 P.3d 13 (Utah Ct. App. 2011) (framework for admitting child sexual-history evidence to rebut sexual-innocence inference)
State v. Richardson, 308 P.3d 526 (Utah 2013) (relevance standard: low threshold; evidence with slightest probative value is relevant)
State v. Martin, 44 P.3d 805 (Utah 2002) (interpretation and purposes of Rule 412 should be broad to protect victims)
State v. Tarrats, 122 P.3d 581 (Utah 2005) (Rule 412 purposes and risks of admitting other sexual-conduct evidence)
State v. Boyd, 25 P.3d 985 (Utah 2001) (trial courts have broad discretion under Rule 403 balancing)
State v. Bravo, 343 P.3d 306 (Utah Ct. App. 2015) (probative value of Rule 412 evidence must outweigh prejudice to be admissible)
State v. Quinonez-Gaiton, 54 P.3d 139 (Utah Ct. App. 2002) (other methods to show delayed reporting may be adequate)
Ross v. Epic Eng’g, PC, 307 P.3d 576 (Utah Ct. App. 2013) (standard for reviewing trial court interpretation/application of procedural rules)
Vigil v. State, 922 P.2d 15 (Utah Ct. App. 1996) (reciting facts in the light most favorable to jury verdict)