State v. Leber, 246 P.3d 163

Leber was convicted of second degree felony child abuse for an incident involving his sixteen-year-old son, Son.
The trial admitted opinion evidence of Leber's violent character and specific acts because Leber allegedly opened the door by referencing Son's violence under Rule 404(a).
Evidence included Leber’s prior child abuse conviction against Son at age six, a 2003 Alaska assault, and a domestic violence incident involving Former Wife.
Testimony from officers, a neighbor, Son’s treating physician, and Former Wife supplemented the trial record about injuries and Leber’s conduct.
The Utah Supreme Court later held the admission of that evidence was erroneous and remanded to consider whether the error was harmless; the appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the erroneous evidence was harmless	State: error is harmless because evidence would be admissible under 404(b).	Leber: erroneous admissions affected credibility and could change outcome.	Not harmless; reversal and new trial required.
Whether 404(b) arguments may be raised on appeal	State urged 404(b) relevance but did not raise earlier; appeal raises it.	Leber argues the issue was not properly preserved for review.	Court declines to consider 404(b) argument raised for the first time on appeal.
Whether pattern-of-abuse evidence and related opinions were properly restricted	State relies on pattern-of-abuse considerations to support self-defense context.	Leber disputes admissibility of opinion and pattern evidence.	Issue not resolved on appeal; court declines to consider this theory.
Whether the neighbor and physical evidence could render the admitted evidence's impact insignificant	Officers’ and neighbor’s observations corroborate version of events favoring State.	Physical evidence and testimony do not definitively credit one version; still uncertain.	Not clearly independent of the erroneously admitted evidence; cannot assure outcome would be the same.
Whether the erroneous evidence undermines confidence in the verdict	The admitted evidence colored credibility determinations and outcome.	No clear impact established beyond credibility battles.	Undermines confidence in verdict; reversal and new trial warranted.

State v. Knight, 734 P.2d 913 (Utah 1987) (reversal warranted when error undermines confidence in verdict)
S.H. ex rel. Robinson v. Bistryski, 923 P.2d 1376 (Utah 1996) (standard for harmless error and impact on verdict)
Gillespie v. Southern Utah State Coll., 669 P.2d 861 (Utah 1983) (jury credibility determinations are exclusive to the jury)
State v. Leber, 216 P.3d 964 (Utah Supreme Court, 2009) (remand to determine harmlessness of erroneous evidence)
Leber I, 167 P.3d 1091 (Utah App. 2007) (initially held no 404(b) inquiry required; later reversed)
Leber II, 216 P.3d 964 (Utah Supreme Court, 2009) (held error in admitting evidence; remanded for harmlessness ruling)
Johnson v. C.T. ex rel. Taylor, 1999 UT 35 (Utah Supreme Court, 1999) (civil/criminal evidence rules on credibility and prejudice)