State v. Pulst
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of sexual assault, sexual intercourse without consent, and indecent exposure for his criminal conduct with A.B. and K.S. The Supreme Court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded, holding that the district court (1) did not abuse its discretion by admitting limited evidence of an uncharged act of sexual assault allegedly committed by Defendant; (2) did not abuse its discretion by excluding evidence that K.S. was physically abused by her husband several years after the sexual assaults; and (3) erred when it issued a written sentence that was partially inconsistent with the sentence it had orally pronounced.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.