Tennessee appellate court hears challenge to admission of prior gun and drug evidence in Stasher trial

An appellate panel in Tennessee heard arguments over whether a trial court improperly admitted prior-conduct evidence and convictions in the gun-possession trial of the defendant, Mr. Stasher.

Defense counsel argued the trial court erred by admitting three categories of evidence — a 2014 firearm conviction, a 2019 narcotics conviction that the state introduced to show felon status, and testimony about a charged-only weapon incident from February 2018 — saying the material was unfairly prejudicial and exceeded the narrow purposes allowed under Tennessee Rules of Evidence 404(b), 609 and 608.

The issue matters because the contested evidence was introduced near the end of the state’s case and during cross-examination, the defense argued, and the state called a detective to testify in detail about the unconvicted 2018 incident. Defense counsel told the court, “there are really 3 rules at issue here. So we have rule 404(b), rule 609, and then rule 608.” He said both the 2014 conviction and the charged-but-not-convicted 2018 conduct were “substantially similar, if not identical” to the charged offense and therefore more prejudicial than probative.

At oral argument the defense emphasized several points: the trial was not conducted in a bifurcated manner (the state introduced the 2019 conviction as substantive proof that…