Case ID: so2d_819/html/0279-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "CALOGERO, C.J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Louisiana v. Clarence SHEPPARD.
    No. 2002-KK-1306.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    May 10, 2002.
   In re State of Louisiana; —Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. O, Nos. 10-00-84; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2002 KW 0967.

Writ granted.

CALOGERO, C.J.,

concurs with reasons.

I agree that the trial court may have prematurely ruled on the admissibility of impeachment evidence the State may seek to introduce through questioning of the defense witness, and that the State should be permitted to explore any bias or interest of the witness in favor of the defense or against the State, within the confines of the Code of Evidence. However, I write separately to note that the trial court remains free to exercise its discretion in ruling on the admissibility of the evidence under the Code of Evidence, including Articles 404, 609.1, and 403, at the time the State seeks to introduce such evidence, which I perceive the action of this court today does not resolve.