State v. Gasper, 436 P.3d 200

In Aug. 2014 Gasper hosted a party where Victim consumed drinks he offered, became ill and fell asleep after a massage; she later woke to find Gasper having sex with her and reported no consent.
Gasper admitted to intercourse with Victim but claimed other explanations for being with her the next morning.
The State sought to admit evidence under Utah R. Evid. 404(b) of a prior January 2013 incident (Witness) in which Gasper allegedly gave an opened beer, touched the woman under the guise of a massage, she became incapacitated, and later awoke with vaginal pain and missing/ lodged tampon.
The district court held an evidentiary hearing, found the prior incident sufficiently similar, and admitted it for the noncharacter purpose of intent (and referenced the doctrine of chances), concluding probative value outweighed unfair prejudice.
Gasper pleaded guilty to second-degree forcible sexual abuse while preserving his right to appeal the 404(b) ruling; the court sentenced him to an indeterminate 1-to-15 year prison term after denying probation.
On appeal Gasper challenged (1) the admission of the prior-bad-act evidence under Rule 404(b) and (2) the denial of probation as an abuse of sentencing discretion.

Issue	State's Argument	Gasper's Argument	Held
Admissibility of prior-bad-act evidence under Utah R. Evid. 404(b)	Prior incident is admissible for noncharacter purposes—showing intent, lack of mistake/consent; similarities (massage pretext, tainted/unsealed drinks, incapacitation, waking to assault) make it relevant and probative	Admission was improper character evidence and unfairly prejudicial; district court abused discretion	Affirmed: evidence admissible for intent; relevance satisfied; probative value not substantially outweighed prejudice; no abuse of discretion
Sentencing: denying probation and imposing 1–15 years	Sentence within court's wide discretion; court considered defendant's background and legally relevant factors	Denial of probation was unfair given defendant's age, education, and background; court abused discretion	Affirmed: no abuse of discretion—court considered relevant factors and sentence not clearly excessive

State v. Reece, 349 P.3d 712 (2015) (standard of appellate review for Rule 404(b) rulings)
State v. Thornton, 391 P.3d 1016 (2017) (encouraging district courts to expressly analyze Rules 404(b), 402, and 403 on the record)
State v. Lucero, 328 P.3d 841 (2014) (three-part admissibility framework for prior-bad-act evidence)
State v. Nelson-Waggoner, 6 P.3d 1120 (2000) (admission of similar prior sexual assaults to prove lack of consent where patterns are distinctive)
State v. Maurer, 770 P.2d 981 (1989) (definition of unfair prejudice in evidentiary context)
State v. Valdovinos, 82 P.3d 1167 (2003) (standard for reviewing sentencing and probation decisions)