Commonwealth vs. Walter Crayton

Summary

The court vacated the defendant's convictions and ordered a new trial because the combined effect of three evidentiary errors created a reasonable possibility of prejudicial influence on the verdict. It established a prospective rule requiring a prosecutor to show good reason before eliciting a first-time in-court identification from an eyewitness who had not previously participated in an identification procedure. The court also held that the defendant's denial should have been admitted under verbal completeness and that the drawings were inadmissible other-bad-acts evidence. No separate opinions were provided.