¶1(dissenting).
¶2In my opinion, admission of Nathan’s confession, purged of all references to the defendant and the acquitted co-defendant, was not prejudicial to the defendant, especially in view of the abundantly sufficient evidence of his guilt. Harrington v. California, 395 U.S. 250, 89 S.Ct. 1726, 23 L. Ed.2d 284.
¶3I would affirm.