Court Opinion

ID: 9738738
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:01:44.374695+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:08.193249
License: Public Domain

OTIS, Justice
(dissenting).
This is another in a series of cases where prosecutors are encouraged to buttress the evidence of defendant’s guilt by resurrecting a ten—year-old conviction to persuade the jury that the accused probably committed the crime with which he is presently charged. To hold that the probative value of introducing a manslaughter conviction for which the defendant has long since been tried, sentenced, and served his time, outweighs the prejudicial effect on the jury is to blind ourselves to reality. It is contrary to all our experience as lawyers and judges. The effect is to establish two disparate levels of justice, one of which in my opinion effectively deprives a defendant of the presumption of innocence and equal protection of the laws.
I submit that after ten years a defendant charged with a subsequent offense should be confronted only with evidence which bears on that matter without his suffering the inevitable consequences of what is tantamount to double jeopardy-twice penalized for the same offense.
I would remand for a new trial excluding the prior conviction.