State of Connecticut v. Roberto Acosta

Summary

The court held that evidence of the defendant’s uncharged sexual misconduct occurring twelve years before the charged offense was not too remote for admission. Applying the required relevance factors together, the court concluded that the intervening misconduct, similarities between the incidents and victims, and the private circumstances of the offenses supported admission, and that the trial court acted within its discretion. The judgment affirming the convictions was affirmed.