Watson v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed Watson’s convictions, holding that the prosecutor’s repetition of prior-conviction questions during cross-examination did not constitute prosecutorial misconduct and that the closing argument did not improperly urge the jury to use those convictions as propensity evidence. The Court alternatively held that, even assuming misconduct, Watson failed to show plain error because the limiting instruction mitigated any prejudice and the evidence of possession was not closely balanced.