P. v. Battles
Terence Nigel Battles appeals a judgment arising out of his conviction of burglary and attempted burglary. (The same judgment also includes convictions on two counts of resisting an officer; however, Battles does not appeal from those convictions and we thus affirm the judgment as to those convictions.) He contends that the trial court erred in admitting unduly prejudicial bad act evidence against him and that there was insufficient evidence to establish that he entered the premises or that he had the specific intent necessary to support either offense. Court agree with Battles's first contention and reverse the judgment on that basis, but reject his challenges to the insufficiency of the evidence and remand the matter for further proceedings.
Comments on P. v. Battles