 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Golphin8/25/2000
y report into evidence.
We now turn to Kevin's argument that the trial court erred in admitting Tilmon's evidence concerning the seizure of Kevin's luggage by the Fayetteville police. Tilmon sought to call Sam Willie McCray, Kevin and Tilmon's grandfather, as a witness. Tilmon initially reminded the trial court of Kevin's motion in limine concerning the admissibility of evidence that Fayetteville police seized drugs from Kevin's luggage. In indicating an intent to call McCray as a witness, Tilmon stated that in a prior interview, "McCray indicated that Kevin told him that he'd been stopped in Fayetteville on the bus; that the cops had taken his luggage but didn't say why the law enforcement officers had taken his luggage." Tilmon further stated he believed "McCray would testify, if asked, that Kevin told him that he was stopped at the bus station, talked to some of the officers and that they left his luggage there -- they seized his luggage after a dog alerted to it." Kevin's counsel then responded: "We haven't put anything on from Kevin that they could use that to impeach. I think under a 404 or 403 balancing test, it still fails the test to come in. And it now becomes, at least for practical purposes here, double hearsay." Kevin's counsel further argued: "It may be a prior bad act statement of the defendant. It's not something Mr. McCray independently knows about." The trial court allowed Tilmon's counsel an opportunity to rebut, and Tilmon's counsel stated: "It is our contention that it bears on the need to take the car; that it was not our client's need; that -- again, that the inability to take the bus back up through Fayetteville was based on Kevin Golphin's problems when he encountered the law enforcement officers in Fayetteville." Tilmon's counsel further indicated that while McCray was not told whether there were drugs in Kevin's luggage, McCray did have a conversation with Kevin about what happened to Kevin's luggage. The trial court then denied Kevin's objection.
Tilmon then called McCray, and the following exchange took place, in pertinent part:
Q: Did you ask Kevin about how he got down [to Greeleyville, S.C.]?
A: Yeah -- yes, I did.
Q: What did he tell you?
A: He tell me he came on the bus.
Q: All right. From Richmond?
A: Yes.
Q: Did he indicate any stops along the way?
A: Well, he told me -- he said the bus stop in Fayetteville.
Q: Fayetteville, North Carolina?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: All right. When you saw Kevin, did he have any luggage with him at all?
A: No, sir.
Q: Kevin tell you anything about why he didn't have any luggage?
A: Well, he said the police had took his luggage in Fayetteville.
Q: Did he tell you why?
A: Uh, no. He just say they take his luggage.
Q: All right. Did they give it back to him?
A: No, sir.
Q: Did he indicate to you why they took the luggage?
[KEVIN'S COUNSEL]: Objection, asked and answered.
A: No, he didn't -- he didn't stated why they take --
THE COURT: Overruled.
A: -- his luggage.
THE COURT: Overruled.
Although Kevin does not specifically argue the admission of this testimony violates his constitutional rights, he makes a general argument to that effect. However, as previously noted, this Court will not address any constitutional issue with regard to the admission of McCray's testimony concerning the seizure of Kevin's luggage because Kevin did not give the trial court an opportunity to pass
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 North Carolina DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|