COMMONWEALTH vs. DARREN BARBOZA, FEBRUARY 5, 2010, SJC
Prior misconduct evidence; Relevancy.
The defendant contended that evidence of a prior charged assault with a dangerous weapon should have been excluded in the present case because (i) he had been acquitted of the prior charge and (ii) the prior charge was not sufficiently probative to be admissible. The SJC disagreed with the defendant, finding no error and that the evidence was properly admitted.
Prior wrongful conduct evidence is not admissible against the defendant to show bad character or propensity to commit a crime, but prior wrongful conduct evidence is admissible for other relevant probative purposes, including proving hostility and motive. The court found that the prosecution was attempting to use the evidence for such a proper purpose. Further, the fact that the defendant was acquitted of the prior charge does not render the evidence inadmissible because to introduce such evidence, the prosecution must only meet a preponderance, and not a reasonable doubt, standard. The SJC grants broad discretion to the trial judge to weigh the probative vs. prejudicial value of proffered evidence.
