Court Opinion

ID: 9647833
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 13:52:13.135528+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:54.075525
License: Public Domain

PALMORE, Judge
(dissenting in part).
Even in my days as a prosecuting attorney I felt that the admission of prior convictions as evidence in chief in the trial of an indictment under the Habitual Criminal Act was so killingly prejudicial as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial on the principal charge. Regrettably, however, it was standard procedure and the only way of invoking the statute. As a judge, I can no longer remain silently acquiescent. I believe the law as it has been thus far construed, allowing the jury to be apprised of the defendant’s past convictions before determining his guilt or innocence of the principal charge, is invalid and will eventually be so held. I dissent from that portion of the majority opinion declining to declare it invalid now.