Convictions upheld despite prior bad act evidence

Listen to this article

A trial judge’s improper admission of prior bad act evidence in a sexual abuse case did not constitute reversible error, the Supreme Judicial Court has ruled.

During her closing argument, the prosecutor asserted that the defendant’s admission to possessing child pornography demonstrated his “state of mind” that he was sexually attracted to children.

The defendant was ultimately convicted of aggravated statutory rape and indecent assault and battery on a child under fourteen.

On appeal, he argued that the judge erred in permitting the prosecutor to make such assertions in her closing argument.

The Supreme Judicial Court agreed.

“ … [T]he defendant’s guilt here did not turn on his state of mind during the commission of the charged acts; rather, it depended on whether the defendant actually committed the acts at all,” Justice David A. Lowy wrote for the court.

“Accordingly, the risk that the jury would conclude that the defendant committed the charged crimes based on his criminal character and propensity, as demonstrated by his arrest for and admission to possession of child pornography, was significant,” the SJC concluded.

However, court ruled that reversal was not warranted because the defendant was not prejudiced by the error.

“[T]he bulk of the prosecutor’s closing argument focused on the Commonwealth’s substantive evidence against the defendant,” Lowy stated.

“Her improper propensity argument ‘was isolated, and “it was not a principal focus of what otherwise was a proper closing argument,”‘” he added.

Citing the strong case presented by the commonwealth, as well as the fact that “the judge emphatically instructed the jury that they could not consider the other act evidence for propensity purposes or to otherwise demonstrate that the defendant had a bad character,” the SJC affirmed the convictions.

The 24-page decision is Commonwealth v. McDonagh, Lawyers Weekly No. 10-127-18.

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.