Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Raymond A. Peltier

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided May 29, 2015No. 2013-310-C.APublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Robinson

I am pleased to concur in the opinion of the majority to the extent that it holds that the trial justice did not abuse his discretion in admitting evidence of the defendant’s resisting arrest as constituting evidence of the defendant’s agitated state of mind at the time of the alleged assault. In view of the very close temporal connection between the alleged simple domestic assault and the act of resisting arrest, the trial justice did not abuse his discretion in admitting the evidence for this limited purpose. However, I respectfully disassociate myself entirely from the majority’s statement…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2007
  2. Grady v. Narragansett Electric Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 2009
  3. State v. SantosSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1980
  4. The PEOPLE v. SustakIllinois Supreme Court · 1958
  5. State v. PalmerSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2009

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API