State v. Andre M. Chamblis

¶ 62. (concurring). Although I join the majority opinion, I depart from the majority analysis because I would not assume without deciding that the circuit court erred by excluding the State's proffered evidence of two Illinois convictions. Instead, I would conclude that the circuit court did not err because it did not erroneously *402exercise its discretion.1 A circuit court's decision to admit or exclude evidence is " 'entitled to great deference.' " State v. Jackson, 2014 WI 4, ¶ 45, 352 Wis. 2d 249, 841 N.W.2d 791 (quoting State v. Head, 2002 WI 99, ¶ 43, 255 Wis. 2d 194, 648 N.W.2d 413). "…