In his Evidence column, Albany Law School professor Michael J. Hutter writes that while the Court of Appeals' 2012 decisions involving an application of the 'Molineux' rule may be viewed by some as nothing more than ad hoc decision-making which provides no guidance to, or at worst obfuscates a 'Molineux' analysis, when the decisions are read together, a general framework governing the application of 'Molineux' to a proffer of other crimes evidence is suggested.
Flurry of Decisions in 2012 on 'Other Crimes' Evidence
New York Law Journal
February 7, 2013
This article requires premium access
This article requires premium access to The New York Law Journal. Please sign in or subscribe to read the full text.