Court Opinion

ID: 9625862
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 07:53:26.080482+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:40.526975
License: Public Domain

Pope, Presiding Judge,
concurring specially.
I fully concur with the majority. I write in response to footnote 1 of the majority opinion. Although our Supreme Court has held that, absent a written request, a trial judge is not required to give a limiting instruction when similar transaction or prior difficulty evidence is admitted, it has also stated that “it would be better for the trial judge to do so.” State v. Belt, 269 Ga. 763, 765 (505 SE2d 1) (1998). In this regard, I would also note my agreement with the dissent in Belt, which states, “It falls to the trial court, as the insurer of the defendant’s right to a fair and impartial trial before an unbiased jury, to inform the jury of the limited use to which it might put the potentially unfairly prejudicial evidence.” Id. at 767.