the first factor — impeachment value of the prior crime — weighs against admission in this case. See id. at 881 (crimes involving deception have greater impact on credibility than crimes of violence). Butler’s prior offense for sexual abuse of a child is not a crime of deception. Second, the closer in time the prior conviction is to t se never occurred and that Christopher had been coached and encouraged by his mother (Butler’s ex-wife) to make false accusations against him. Kelley Fromme, Butler’s girlfriend who Christopher said also participated in the indecency, likewise denied that any improper acts occurred. This presented the jury with a basic conflict to resolve, and under the circumstances Butler’s credibility and the value of his testimony took on increased importance. See id. (<HOLDING>). The last two factors, then, militate in favor
holding that summary convictions of crimes involving dishonesty could be used to impeach the credibility of a witness holding that the need to impeach credibility correspondingly increases as the importance of the witness credibility and testimony escalates holding that conviction on appeal is not admissible to impeach witnesss credibility holding that a trial witnesss testimony as to the credibility of another witness was prejudicial error holding that the jury is the judge of the weight and credibility given to witness testimony