State v. Shaw

Summary

The dissent would uphold the trial court’s exclusion of the defendant’s proposed evidence and questioning concerning the victim’s alleged sexual relationship with her brother. It reasons that the defendant offered only inadmissible hearsay, speculation, and unsubstantiated beliefs, and therefore failed to satisfy the rape-shield statute’s requirements that the evidence be relevant and more probative than prejudicial. The dissent contends that the majority’s contrary approach substantially undermines the statute’s protections for sexual-assault victims.