Priester v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Priester's convictions, assuming without deciding that the admission of evidence concerning a prior armed robbery and shooting was erroneous. It held that any evidentiary error was harmless because the properly admitted evidence of guilt was strong and the limiting instructions reduced the likelihood of prejudice. The court also held that the challenged jury instructions did not constitute reversible plain error because, viewed as a whole, they were unlikely to have affected the verdict.