Commonwealth v. Crouse

A jury in the Superior Court convicted the defendant on indictments charging murder in the first degree (based on theories of deliberate premeditation and extreme atrocity or cruelty)1 and arson of a dwelling. Represented by new counsel on appeal, the defendant claims that a new trial is warranted because of errors in (1) the denial of his motion in limine to preclude the Commonwealth from introducing evidence of his prior convictions to impeach his trial testimony if he chose to testify; (2) five separate evidentiary rulings made during the trial; (3) the judge’s refusal to permit defense…