Evidence of a Third Party's Guilt of the Crime that the Accused is Charged with: The Constitutionalization of the SODDI (Some Other Dude Did It) Defense 2.0

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 92 I. A DESCRIPTION OF THE TRADITIONAL SODDI DEFENSE ................... 96 A. The Majority View ...................................................................... 96 1. Evidence of the Third Party’s Involvement in the Charged Crime ..................................................................... 97 2. Evidence of the Third Party’s Commission of Crimes Similar to the Charged Crime .............................................. 99 B. The Minority View ................................................................... 102 II. A DESCRIPTION OF THE SODDI DEFENSE 2.0 .................................. 104 A. The Judicial Recognition of the SODDI Defense 2.0 .............. 105 1. Alvarez v. Ercole ................................................................ 105 2. State v. McCullar ............................................................... 109 B. The Evidentiary Differences Between the Original SODDI Defense and the SODDI Defense 2.0 ....................................... 113 1. Hearsay .............................................................................. 113 2. Character ............................................................................ 115 III. A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE LEGITIMACY OF THE SODDI DEFENSE 2.0 .................................................................................... 118 A. Objection #1: As a Matter of Law, the Inferences Supported by the Defense Are Too Speculative to Create Reasonable Doubt .................................................................... 119 1. There Were Multiple Perpetrators ..................................... 121 2. The Third Party Was Not a Plausible Suspect ................... 122 3. In Retrospect, It Is Clear that the Third Party Did Not