State v. Losee, 283 P.3d 1055

Losee, jailed in 2006 for a May 2006 assault on Victim, faced related charges in the May Assault case.
While incarcerated, Losee proposed killing Victim for $500, syringes, and access to stolen guns, via First Inmate.
Losee provided a map and detailed plan to murder Victim, aiming to stage an overdose rather than a shooting.
First Inmate alerted authorities; the map and Losee’s statements were disclosed during investigation.
Losee was charged with solicitation to commit aggravated murder, tried in April 2008, and convicted; sentenced five years to life consecutive to the May Assault sentence.
The trial court admitted evidence of the May Assault under Rule 404(b); Losee challenges this ruling and raises ex post facto concerns about sentencing

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of May Assault evidence under Rule 404(b)	Losee: evidence shows propensity to crime; irrelevant to solicitation.	State: evidence shows emotional motive/intent; not just propensity.	Admissible for motive/intent; not unduly prejudicial.
Ex post facto challenge to sentencing	Sentence as first-degree felony violates ex post facto if punishment greater than at crime time.	Law at time of commission/sentencing aligned; no greater punishment.	No ex post facto violation; sentencing lawful under governing statutes.

State v. Nelson ‐ Waggoner, 2000 UT 59 (Utah 2000) (404(b) analysis and balancing factors for other acts evidence)
State v. Decorso, 1999 UT 57 (Utah 1999) (propensity evidence not allowed; proper purpose required)
State v. Holbert, 2002 UT App 426 (Utah App. 2002) (prior conduct admissible to show motive/intent to terrorize victim)
State v. Shickles, 760 P.2d 291 (Utah 1988) (Shickles factors for Rule 403 balancing)
State v. Northcutt, 2008 UT App 357 (Utah App. 2008) (credibility/evidentiary conflicts; court’s vantage on rulings)