I have an upcoming DV case going trial. I'd like to introduce some extraneous facts regarding prior DV instances between Defendant and CW. I have a newly appointed judge on the bench and need to write a brief on this topic. Curious if anyone has recently argued this new statute (CCP 38.371) to allow the introduction of extraneous acts. What arguments were/weren't persuasive? Did you cite to any particular cases? Would love some overall feedback.

From the TDCAA 2015 Criminal Laws book:

HB 2645 enacts this article to allow either party in a family violence trial to offer testimony or other evidence about facts or circumstances relevant to the offense that would help the factfinder determine guilt, including details about the nature of the relationship between the actor and the alleged victim. The admission of such evidence is still subject to the Rules of Evidence or other related laws, but in practice, this article should help prosecutors give jurors a more complete picture of an alleged perpetrator’s history of violence with a particular victim. Other analogous statutes are Art. 38.36 (Evidence in Prosecutions for Murder), Art. 38.37 (Evidence of Extraneous Offenses or Acts), Art. 38.46 (Evidence in Prosecutions for Stalking), and Art. 38.48 (Evidence in Prosecution for Tampering with Witness or Prospective Witness Involving Family Violence) – although some of these laws governing the admissibility of extraneous acts differ from that enacted by HB 2645, so read each one carefully before comparing and contrasting them.

And while I haven't heard back about its actual implementation, the way I’ve interpreted it for the few people who have called TDCAA and asked me is as if 404(b) stated: “Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, or to show facts and circumstances that would assist a trier of fact in a family violence case, including the nature of the relationship, . . . "

I am curious how others have interpreted or used the new statute.