Yes, I am quite aware of that. Judge, we object again. . . . The area of the west side. 16th and Arrow. A review of the entire record leads me to conclude that the evidence of Swain's prior convictions was properly admitted.
Defense counsel appears to have had two strategies.
One was to defend Swain by attacking the police officers' motives. The second was to force the admission of an explanation, knowing that it was not otherwise admissible, as to why the officers were looking for Swain. After cautioning from the court, defense counsel persisted in the line of questioning that produced the results of which he now complains. The evidence was properly admitted to rebut the inference raised by the defense that the officers' only interest in surveying and arresting Swain was because of his race. If Swain had been improperly stopped or arrested, counsel could have filed a motion to suppress the tainted evidence.