Woodward v. State

As I believe that the majority has today effectively eliminated Uniform Superior Court Rule 31.1, I must respectfully dissent. Because the trial court erred by denying Woodward’s motion for a continuance and by allowing the State to introduce the similar transaction evidence without complying with USCR 31.1 and 31.3,1 would reverse this case.

This appeal concerns whether the Uniform Superior Court Rules apply equally to the prosecution and to the defendant and whether the prosecution must suffer any consequence for completely failing to *369comply with them. As I believe that the Rules must apply…