Commonwealth v. Broaster

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that admission of evidence that defendant discarded a handgun not connected to the murder was properly admitted where it was relevant and limiting instructions were issued by both the prosecutor and trial court
• noting that the jury was informed that the gun admitted into evidence was not the murder weapon and the court's charge to the jury explained the limited use to which they could put the defendant’s possession of the discarded weapon
• allowing Commonwealth to present handgun, which was not murder weapon, recovered three months later to “demonstrate [a]ppellant’s access to and preference for the same type of weapon . . . as used in [the] murder”
• Handgun discarded by defendant was relevant to identify defendant and connect him with crime, even though handgun was not murder weapon.
• evidence of defendant’s possession of other gun loaded with the same distinctive combination of bullet types as the murder weapon was admissible to identify defendant and connect him to the murder

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).