People v. Scott

PRESIDING JUSTICE TOOMIN

delivered the opinion of the court:

In a spark of creativity, appellant maintains that his purported right to choose whether to testify was impeded by the trial judge’s blanket policy of deferring rulings on motions limiting the admissibility of prior convictions. Although we presumed the issue had been laid to rest by our supreme court in Averett 1 , the changing contours of the landscape require that we again weigh in on this resurrected saga. We also address appellant’s additional claim that the trial court erred in admitting irrelevant and prejudicial testimony.

Follo…