A jury found Gary Whitt guilty of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and carrying a concealed weapon. The trial judge sentenced Whitt to serve five years in confinement for the first offense and 12 months in confinement for the concealed weapon offense. Whitt appeals, challenging only his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Whitt’s sole argument is that the trial court erred in rejecting his offer to stipulate that he is a convicted felon and in instead allowing the state to introduce evidence of his prior conviction for aggravated child molestation. The state concedes that under the authority of Ross v. State 1 the trial court did err in refusing Whitt’s stipulation offer. But as in Ross , the state argues, the error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of Whitt’s guilt. We agree with the state’s argument and thus affirm the conviction.
In Ross , the Supreme Court announced the rule that under certain circumstances it is error for a trial court to reject a defendant’s offer to stipulate to a prior conviction. We hereby set forth the limited rule that when 1 a defendant’s prior conviction is of the nature likely to inflame the passions of the jury and raise the risk of a conviction based on improper considerations, and 2 the purpose of the evidence is solely to prove the defendant’s status as a convicted felon, then it is an abuse of discretion for the trial court to spurn the defendant’s offer to stipulate to his prior conviction and admit the evidence to the jury.2 In Ross , the Supreme Court went on to find that the trial court had abused its discretion in rejecting the defendant’s offer to stipulate to his prior conviction for enticing a child for indecent purposes since evidence of that conviction was unnecessary to prove anything other than the defendant’s status as a convicted felon and such evidence could raise the risk of a verdict tainted by improper considerations.3 Likewise, in the instant case, Whitt’s prior conviction for aggravated child molestation is of the nature that is likely to inflame a jury and risk a conviction based on improper considerations. And since the purpose of any evidence of that conviction was solely to prove Whitt’s status as a convicted felon, the trial court abused its discretion in rejecting Whitt’s offer to stipulate to his prior conviction.
