Beekeeper » 23 minutes ago » wrote: ↑![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
In summary, we conclude that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of the defendant’s voting history and precluding Botelho’s statements relating to the 2016 election under Rule 404(b). We also conclude that, should Botelho on remand assert his Fifth Amendment rights, the trial court shall conduct a Richards hearing. Accordingly, we reverse the defendant’s conviction and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Do you know what that MEANS, ****??