(concurring in the result).

The modern trend is to permit more freely the admission of evidence of collateral crimes in cases such as this because such crimes involve a passion or propensity for deviant and unnatural behavior. See my dissent in Bowden v. State, 538 So.2d 1226 (Ala. 1988). I concur in the result reached in this case, however, for the same reason I concurred in Ex parte Cofer, 440 So.2d 1121 (Ala. 1983), the remoteness of the collateral crime.

(dissenting).

Based on the authority cited in the dissenting opinion in Bowden v. State, 538 So.2d 1226 (Ala. 1988), I must respectfully dissent. I believe the Court of Criminal Appeals’ ruling places too great a limit on the admission of evidence of prior bad acts in cases involving sex crimes. Therefore, I disagree with the majority’s decision to quash the writ.

WRIT QUASHED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED.