State v. Robertson, 183 So. 3d 1287

Defendant Michael Robertson was charged with first-degree murder of his eight-year-old son, Xzayvion Riley, in East Baton Rouge Parish.
The State gave notice under La. C.E. art. 404(B) / State v. Prieur of intent to introduce prior-bad-act evidence; the trial court held a seven-day Prieur hearing.
Four prior incidents involving physical abuse of Xzayvion were at issue: (1) Nov. 2008—face injuries from a belt; (2) Aug. 2010—neck injury and bruising including groin; (3) Feb. 2012—fractured femur and untreated lacerations/bruises; (4) repeated hitting/forcing to run as observed by victim’s sister.
The trial court excluded some of these incidents or limited their use; both parties sought review in the First Circuit, which denied writs.
The Louisiana Supreme Court reviewed whether the trial court abused its discretion in excluding or limiting the evidence and whether the evidence was admissible under La. C.E. art. 404(B) and Prieur principles.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Robertson)	Held
Admissibility of prior-bad-act evidence under art. 404(B)/Prieur	Prior acts show a pattern, tend to prove material issues (intent, identity) and rebut defenses; are independently relevant	Prior acts are remote, overly prejudicial, or only admissible for limited purposes	Court: Trial court abused its discretion; prior acts are admissible because probative and not unduly prejudicial
Remoteness of 2008 incident	2008 abuse is probative despite temporal gap given victim's young age and pattern over years	Too remote to be probative of charged murder	Court: 2008 incident not too remote; admissible
Prejudicial vs. probative value of 2010 neck injuries	Neck injuries are relevant to intent/identity and not unduly prejudicial	Neck injuries more prejudicial than probative	Court: Trial court erred in excluding neck injury evidence as unduly prejudicial
Scope of 2012 fractured femur/lacerations & sister’s observations	Fractured femur/lacerations and sister’s testimony show pattern and rebut defenses; admissible for more than identity	Evidence should be limited to identity or excluded	Court: Limiting to identity or excluding was abuse of discretion; evidence admissible with limiting instructions as needed

State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La. 1973) (establishes procedure for notice and admissibility of other-crimes evidence)
State v. Germain, 433 So.2d 110 (La. 1983) (prior child-abuse incidents may be admitted to prove intent and rebut accidental-injury defenses)
State v. Rose, 949 So.2d 1236 (La. 2007) (discusses general inadmissibility of other acts and balancing probative vs. prejudicial)
State v. Humphrey, 412 So.2d 507 (La. 1981) (previous abuse unique to defendant increases relevancy for homicide)
State v. Galliano, 839 So.2d 932 (La. 2003) (prior violence against a child may be prejudicial but not so inflammatory as to bar admissibility)
State v. Altenberger, 139 So.3d 510 (La. 2014) (permits evidence of long-term abuse to show pattern despite temporal span)
State v. Miller, 718 So.2d 960 (La. 1998) (trial court should give contemporaneous limiting instructions when admitting other-crimes evidence)
State v. Blank, 955 So.2d 90 (La. 2007) (clear-and-convincing evidence standard for Prieur evidence in capital cases)
State v. Jacobs, 803 So.2d 933 (La. 2001) (applies clear-and-convincing threshold in capital-case Prieur context)