State v. Guss

Per CüRiam.

Defendant testified in his own behalf and produced witnesses who gave testimony of his good character. The court instructed the jury as to this evidence of good character: “. . . it is to be received and considered by you for a two-fold purpose, first as going to the credibility of the defendant, Lawrence Guss, and secondly, as substantive evidence bearing directly upon his evidence.” (Emphasis added). The instruction is erroneous. If a defendant is a witness in his own behalf and produces evidence of his good character, the character evidence is to be considered as substantive…