Carl Mouton v. State of Arkansas

Summary

The court affirmed the exclusion of evidence concerning the victim's prior sexual relationship with another student under the rape-shield rule and held that the exclusion did not violate Mouton's constitutional right to present a complete defense because his theory of fabrication lacked sufficient supporting facts. The court dismissed the State's cross-appeal because the evidentiary ruling concerning a proposed similar-act witness was a fact-specific application of the evidence rules and therefore was not appealable by the State. Chief Justice Kemp and Justice Baker concurred separately, agreeing with the result but concluding that the excluded relationship was irrelevant rather than merely outweighed by prejudice.