Nundra v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Nundra’s convictions, assuming without deciding that the admission of his prior convictions and evidence concerning the victim’s good character were erroneous but concluding that both errors were harmless individually and cumulatively. The court also held that the prosecutor’s comparisons of Nundra to serial killers were permissible inferences during closing argument and that Nundra failed to establish plain error in the admission of TrueAllele DNA evidence. The court emphasized the strength of the properly admitted evidence, the limiting and anti-sympathy instructions, and Nundra’s failure to preserve the specific DNA objection.