Summary 2006 WY 12

Summary of Decision issued January 20, 2006

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it is issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance.]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Sanchez v. State

Citation: 2006 WY 12

Docket Number: 04-183

Appeal from the District Court of Carbon County, Honorable Kenneth Stebner, Judge

Representing Appellant (Defendant): Kenneth M. Koski, Public Defender; and Donna D. Domonkos, Appellate Counsel.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff): Patrick J. Crank, Wyoming Attorney General; Paul S. Rehurek, Deputy Attorney General; D. Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General; and David L. Delicath, Senior Assistant Attorney General.

Date of Decision: January 20, 2006

Issues: Whether extrinsic impeachment evidence admitted by the district court was harmless error. Whether the prosecutor committed misconduct during his closing argument. Whether the district court erred in excluding evidence concerning the victim’s affiliation with an “outlaw” motorcycle gang.

Holdings: Impeachment of witness Tappan: The district court concluded that if Tappan had testified at trial, his credibility would have been subject to attack by the prosecution, and that the incident that Appellant’s trial counsel objected to was a fair and relevant attack on Tappan’s credibility. Even if the district court had erred, Appellant would still have had to demonstrate that such an error warranted a reversal of her conviction. The Court reviewed the evidence received at trial which revealed that Tappan’s credibility did not hinge upon the objected testimony. The Court could not find that there was a reasonable possibility that the verdict might have been more favorable to the Appellant if the testimony at issue had been excluded.
Prosecutorial Misconduct: When there is no objection raised at trial, the standard of review is plain error. The Court reviewed the record and found that the prosecutor was suggesting reasonable inferences that could be made from the evidence received at trial. Appellant did not demonstrate that the prosecutor’s closing argument violated a clear and unequivocal rule of law.
Motorcycle Gang Affiliation Evidence: The Court focused on the district court’s analysis pursuant to W.R.E. 403 which rule provides that although relevant, “evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.” The Court applies an abuse of discretion standard for review. The Court found after a review of the record that whatever probative value the testimony might have had in this case was diminished by concerns regarding unfair prejudice. The Court concluded that the Appellant had not demonstrated that the district court clearly abused its discretion in excluding the testimony.

The decree of the district court was affirmed.

J. Voigt delivered the opinion for the court.

Link to the case: http://tinyurl.com/9lnmx .