A New Jersey appeals court on Wednesday reversed a rape conviction because testimony about whether the defendant had an unusually large penis exceeded its proper scope.
The panel in State v. Pena held that the prejudicial impact of testimony about the defendant’s earlier conviction for exposing himself in public, despite the trial judge’s limiting instruction, substantially outweighed its probative value because the offenses were so similar the jury could have inferred a predisposition to such conduct.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
