PENNSYLVANIA
Pennsylvania Superior Court
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
WILLIAM J. LYNN,
Appellant No. 2171 EDA 2012
Appeal from the Judgment of Entered Sentence July 24, 2012
In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0003530-2011
… In sum, we conclude that the probative value of the individual portions that made up the large quantity of other-acts evidence in this case differed greatly. A limited portion of that evidence was substantially relevant to, or probative of, permitted uses under Rule 404(b)(2), but far more was only marginally relevant for such purposes. The potential for this evidence to unfairly prejudice Appellant was high, both because it involved the sexually abusive acts of numerous priests committed against children over several decades, and because of the high volume of the evidence admitted.
Therefore, we conclude that the probative value of that evidence, in toto, did not outweigh its potential for unfair prejudice, and that this potential prejudice was not overcome by the trial court’s cautionary instructions.
Consequently, we hold that the trial court abused its discretion in its application of Rule 404(b)(2). As our judgement requires that Appellant receive a new trial, we decline to address Appellant’s remaining claims of error.
Judgment of sentence vacated. Case remanded for a new trial. Jurisdiction relinquished.
Judge Musmanno joins this memorandum.
Judge Donohue files a concurring and dissenting memorandum.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 12/22/2015
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.