v. Baker

Summary

The court held that the deputy securities commissioner’s expert testimony was inadmissible because she treated disputed factual allegations as true, assessed witness credibility, and applied securities law to those facts in a manner that effectively suggested Baker’s guilt. Baker preserved his evidentiary challenge, did not invite the error, and the erroneous testimony was not harmless because it likely carried special credibility with the jury. The court affirmed the court of appeals’ judgment and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.