holding that references to defendant as an “illegal alien” were inadmissible; however, the error was harmless on direct appeal
How later courts described this case
- holding that references to defendant as an “illegal alien” were inadmissible; however, the error was harmless on direct appeal
- noting that references to the defendant as an illegal alien were prejudicial because they permitted the jury to infer that the defendant was prone to engage in criminal conduct
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
HOFFMAN, Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully note my dissent. I believe that the harmless error doctrine has been indiscriminately exaggerated and overextended. The jury here reasonably could have made the inference that appellant had engaged in prior criminal activity. Indeed, to the average juror the revelation that appellant was an “illegal alien” connotes malodorous and repugnant behavior. From those deliberate references to this unrelated and irrelevant criminal activity, the juror could derive appellant’s guilt. Therefore, I would find that the error was not harmless and that there was a reasonable possibility, even likelihood, that the references by the Commonwealth contributed to the conviction. See Commonwealth v. Story, 476 Pa. 391, 409 , 383 A.2d 155, *245 166 (1978) (citation omitted). Accordingly, I would remand for a new trial.