 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
North Carolina v. Williams6/2/1988
The issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in allowing the state to impeach one of defendant's witnesses, David Small, by use of extrinsic evidence of prior inconsistent statements. We conclude admission of the impeachment testimony constitutes reversible error.
I
At trial, the nineteen-year-old prosecutrix testified that on the evening of 28 December 1986 she went to the Starlight Palace Club with Mary Small, David Small, Lennie Alston and defendant. She later left the club with defendant and Alston. As the three
drove home, defendant "took a short cut," stopped the car and told the victim that she would have to "give him something." Defendant then continued driving. About fifteen minutes later defendant again stopped the car. The victim testified that, while Lennie Alston held her down, defendant got on top of her and used the weight of his body to pin her hands down so that she could not move. Defendant then took off her pantyhose and panties and, after several attempts, inserted his penis in her vagina. After having sexual intercourse with her, defendant took her home.
Defendant testified on his own behalf. He admitted leaving the Starlight Palace Club with the victim and Lennie Alston. However, he testified that he took the victim directly to her house and denied ever having sexual intercourse with her.
Defendant's sister, Mary Small, testifying on defendant's behalf, said the victim had flirted with defendant and had insisted on leaving the Starlight Palace Club with him. She also testified the victim had called and told her she had been raped.
Robert Small, defendant's brother-in-law, also testified on defendant's behalf. Robert Small corroborated his wife Mary's testimony and stated the victim had also flirted with him on 28 December. On cross-examination Small admitted he was on probation for driving under the influence . The following exchange then occurred:
Q. And isn't it true that [defendant] told you that he did have sex with her that evening?
A. He ain't never told me that. He ain't never told me that. . . .
Q. And isn't it true that you have discussed this matter with your probation officer, Robert Terry? . . . .
A. No . . . .
Q. You deny that you were in Robert Terry's office on this day and that you told him that . . . Darrell Williams told you that he had in fact had sex with [victim]?
A. I deny it all. I didn't tell. I didn't tell my probation officer that.
Following this testimony the state called two rebuttal witnesses in an attempt to impeach Small's testimony. The state first called Robert Terry, Small's probation officer, and proposed to ask him whether Small had told him that defendant had admitted raping the victim. Over objection, Robert Terry testified as follows:
Q. . . . Did he specifically at any time tell you whether or not his brother-in-law had told him what had gone on between he and [victim]?
A. Yes. . . . He stated that the conversation that he had with Darrell Williams, his brother-in-law, was that his brother-in-law told him the whole detail of what happened, and that he did rape. And so I didn't ask him for any details, because I didn't want to hear any more.
Following the testimony of Robert Terry, the state called a second rebuttal witness, Monique Mills. Ms. Mills, a summer employee of Robert Terry, had been present in the room at the time of the alleged conversation between David Small and Robert Terry. Before allowing Ms. Mills to testify the trial court instructed the jury as follows:
All right. Members of the
Page 1 2 3 North Carolina DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|