State v. S. Belcourt

Summary

The Court affirmed the convictions and held that the District Court properly excluded generalized evidence of the victim’s Internet history under the relevance and prejudice rules. Evidence that the victim expressed interest in BDSM-related acts other than strangulation did not tend to show that Belcourt knew she consented to or was aroused by strangulation, and its limited probative value was outweighed by risks of unfair prejudice and confusion. The limitation did not violate Belcourt’s confrontation rights or constitute structural error.