In re the Estate of Vaughn

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that evidence that the defendant was a drug dealer intrinsic evidence because “it form[ed] an integral and natural part of the witness’s accounts of the circumstances surrounding the offenses for which the defendant was indicted”
• declining to consider whether prior bad acts evidence was admissible to show intent under Rule 404 (b) when trial court did not specifically consider that issue below
• explaining, in reversing the appellant’s convictions due to the improper admission of evidence that was not harmless, that the prosecution emphasized during closing argument that the evidence showed that the appellant had a propensity to commit crimes
• error was not harmless in part because the State emphasized erroneously admitted Rule 404 (b) evidence in closing
• in evaluating nonconstitutional harmless error, we “examine whether it is highly probable that the error did not contribute to the verdict”
• error was not harmless in part because the State emphasized erroneously admitted Rule 404 (b) evidence in closing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).