Law Review and Bar Journal References:

"Other Vices, Other Crimes: An Evidentiary Dilemma," M. C. Slough, 20 K.L.R. 411, 412 (1972).

The legal effect of jury answers to special verdict questions under Kansas comparative negligence law, David E. Pierce, 16 W.L.J. 114, 121 (1976).

"Evidence of Other Crimes in Kansas," Randall K. Rathbun and Chad M. Renn, 17 W.L.J. 98, 106 (1977).

"Survey of Kansas Law: Evidence," Spencer A. Gard, 27 K.L.R. 225, 233 (1979).

"Other Misconduct Evidence," Christopher M. Joseph, 49 K.L.R. 145 (2000).

"Call it a 'Plan' and A Defendant's Prior (Similar) Sexual Misconduct Is In: The Disappearance of K.S.A. 60-455," Troy W. Purinton, 70 J.K.B.A. No. 8, 30 (2001).

"How Similar is Similar?: Confusing the Similarity Standard for the Admission of Prior Crimes Evidence Under the Plan Exception in Child Molestation Cases [State v. Jones, 85 P.3d 1226 (Kan. 2004)]," Joletta Friesen, 44 W.L.J. 157 (2004).

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Cited in case concerning evidence of injuries resulting from operation of an emergency vehicle. Scogin v. Nugen, 204 Kan. 568, 576, 464 P.2d 166.

2. Evidence of habit or custom is relevant to behavior on specific occasion. Frase v. Henry, 444 F.2d 1228, 1232.

3. Cited; evidence of past crimes held inadmissible as not within any exception hereunder. State v. Davis, 213 Kan. 54, 57, 515 P.2d 802.

4. Applied; error to exclude reputation and character evidence on issue of aggressor; assault and battery damage action. Carrick v. McFadden, 216 Kan. 683, 686, 688, 533 P.2d 1249.

5. Admission of evidence of deceased's good character during state's case in chief and before attack thereon error; new trial ordered. State v. Bradley, 223 Kan. 710, 712, 576 P.2d 647.

6. Cited in holding evidence of good character admissible under K.S.A. 60-447. State v. Sullivan, 224 Kan. 110, 124, 578 P.2d 1108.

7. Admission of evidence concerning defendant's intoxication at time of accident upheld; comparative negligence action. Miles v. West, 224 Kan. 284, 288, 580 P.2d 876.

8. Error to exclude evidence of prior carelessness of defendant's employee when offered to show negligence in supervision. McGraw v. Sanders Co. Plumbing & Heating, Inc., 233 Kan. 766, 770, 667 P.2d 289 (1983).

9. Question reserved merely attacking adverse decision on evidentiary question does not meet standard of statewide interest. State v. Brown, 236 Kan. 800, 802, 696 P.2d 954 (1985).

10. Cited; exclusion of lay witness testimony regarding defendant's good character as inadmissible and lacking probative value examined. State v. Kuone, 243 Kan. 218, 231, 757 P.2d 289 (1988).

11. When evidence regarding prior civil wrongs (K.S.A. 60-455) admissible examined; factors to be considered by trial court in ruling upon admissibility examined. Brunett v. Albrecht, 248 Kan. 634, 638, 810 P.2d 276 (1991).

12. Evidence of character trait with respect to care or skill inadmissible to prove quality of conduct on specified occasion. Herbstreith v. de Bakker, 249 Kan. 67, 77, 815 P.2d 102 (1991).

13. Evidence of prior incident to show opportunity admitted (related first-degree murder case where bodies of victims never found). State v. Grissom, 251 Kan. 851, 922, 840 P.2d 1142 (1992).

14. Admissibility of prior crimes evidence examined. State v. Synoracki, 253 Kan. 59, 853 P.2d 24 (1993).

15. Under facts, evidence of prior falls to prove habit inadmissible in trip and fall case. Hardesty v. Coastal Mart, Inc., 259 Kan. 645, 653, 915 P.2d 41 (1996).

16. Prior statements of defendant and evidence of discordant relationship between defendant and victim admissible. State v. Clark, 261 Kan. 460, 471, 931 P.2d 664 (1997).

17. Trial court ruling that testimony regarding custom and habit lacked credibility was inadmissible not erroneous. State v. Mitchell, 23 Kan. App. 2d 413, 422, 932 P.2d 1012 (1997).