State v. Cruthirds

After a jury trial, Appellant was found guilty of elevated aggravated assault, burglary, and violation of a condition of release. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not err in (1) admitting into evidence a witness’s videotaped interview with police; (2) excluding evidence of an alternative suspect; (3) imposing a significant sanction on the State for a discovery violation; (4) declining to instruct the jury that it could infer that evidence destroyed by the State was favorable to Appellant; and (5) declining to allow Appellant to play a 911 tape during his initial cross-examination of a police detective. Further, the State’s destruction of the victim’s clothing and failure to produce certain witness statements in discovery did not violate Defendant’s right to due process or deprive him of a fair trial. View "State v. Cruthirds" on Justia Law