Richard Shreck, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee

Summary

The court affirmed the appellant’s convictions and sentences, holding that evidence concerning his discussions and preparations involving “snuff” sex was relevant character evidence during the sentencing phase and was not unfairly prejudicial. Because the evidence related to deviant sexual activity discussed while planning the charged conspiracies, the circuit court did not abuse its discretion by admitting it. Justice Hart, dissenting, would have reversed and remanded for a new sentencing hearing because the evidence concerned fantasies and uncharged conduct that was more prejudicial than probative.