homicide was admissible as similar fact evidence. Id. at 628. In that case, the defendant was convicted of three counts of first-degree murder and sexual battery for the strangulation murders of three women. Id. at 619. The defendant admitted to killing all three victims, but his defense was that “the killings ‘just happened’ when he ‘lost it’ during consensual sex.” Id. at 628. This Court concluded that the third, similar homicide was relevant to the issues of lack of consent, premeditation, intent, and absence of mistake, which that evidence that twenty-three days before the murder, defendant had beaten the victim, with whom he was living, to the point that she became unconscious was “proper as evidence of premeditation”); see also Dennis v. State, 817 So.2d 741, 761 (Fla.2002) (<HOLDING>). However, trial courts should be cautious and
holding evidence of prior drug use admissible to show motive and the nature of the defendants relationship with coconspirators holding evidence of sexual assault relevant to show defendants motive in kidnapping victim holding that evidence of uncharged incest with the same victim is admissible to illustrate the relationship existing between the defendant and the victim holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the state to introduce direct evidence of the controlling nature of defendants relationship with the victim holding that evidence that the defendant had stalked threatened and assaulted the victim his exgirlfriend was evidence as to the nature of the defendants relationship with the victim and that it was relevant to establish motive