The State, Respondent v. Charles Pagan, Petitioner

Summary

The court held that testimony about Petitioner's later failure to stop for a blue light and his explanation that he was accused of murder was inadmissible as flight evidence, corroboration, or identity evidence under Rule 404(b). Nevertheless, the court concluded the error was harmless because the evidence had minimal prejudicial impact and other competent evidence established Petitioner's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, so it affirmed the conviction as modified. Justice MOORE, dissenting, would have reversed and remanded for a new trial because identity was critical and the erroneous evidence, coupled with the identification instruction, was prejudicial.