Court Opinion

ID: 9775403
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 18:57:03.378228+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:25.762613
License: Public Domain

STUMBO, Justice,
dissenting.
Respectfully, I must dissent. I believe it was error to admit the testimony in regard to the John Dix robbery under the guise of establishing motive or identity. The prejudicial effect of this testimony far outweighed its probative value.
The Dix robbery, about which McKee and other witnesses testified, had no similarity to the crime for which Appellant was being tried. Had the Commonwealth perhaps limited the testimony of McKee to his observa*185tion of Appellant with a gun, this testimony would have been admissible. But it was unnecessary and overly prejudicial to describe the abduction/robbery of Dix, the threats made, the use of marijuana during the crime, and other facts that simply served to tarnish Appellant’s character and assure a heavy sentence.