People v. Hudson

Defendant was found guilty of being an armed habitual criminal and sentenced to nine years in prison. He challenged his conviction on direct appeal, alleging that the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, that the trial court committee multiple errors when responding to questions from the jury, and that the trial court erroneously barred testimony relating to the search warrant that led to defendant’s arrest. The appellate court was persuaded by defendant’s third argument and reversed and remanded, finding that absent the ability to introduce evidence that the warrant was targeting a different person, testimony about the warrant caused an inference of “predetermined guilt.” (PUCINSKI, concurring and COGHLAN, dissenting)