It is elementary in New York that a prosecutor in a criminal case may not introduce evidence of other crimes or "bad acts" committed by the defendant, whether the subject of a conviction or uncharged, so-called "other crimes evidence," where its only purpose is to show criminal character or disposition from which consistent conduct on the occasion in question may be inferred.1 The reason other crimes evidence is barred when offered for that purpose is it is laden with the dangerous baggage of prejudice to the defendant and time-consuming collateral inquiries, which typically outweigh whatever probative value the evidence may possess.2
However, under the Molineux rule, as set forth in the seminal case of People v. Molineux, other crimes evidence may be admissible where its purpose is other than to establish defendant’s criminal character or disposition.3 When the evidence has such a permitted purpose, admission is not absolutely barred, as it would otherwise be, "for in that event the evidence is relevant for a purpose other than to show a criminal disposition and its probative value is deemed to outweigh the danger of prejudice."4 Notably, it may be admissible even if it may also tend to show criminal disposition.
This content has been archived.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]
