The victim gave written and oral statements consistent with the above facts recited. By his first assignment of error, defendant argues that the trial court abused its discretion in sustaining the State's objections to leading questions asked by defendant to his witness on direct examination. According to defendant, as a result of the trial court's ruling, the jury was prevented from hearing evidence of a prior inconsistent statement by the victim, thereby depriving defendant of his right of confrontation, right to present a defense, and right to due process, contrary to the state and federal constitutions. We cannot agree. Whether to allow leading questions is in the sound discretion of the trial court and the ruling of the trial court will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion.
Abuse of discretion occurs when the ruling of the trial court is manifestly unsupported by reason.
Leading questions should not be used on direct examination except to develop the testimony of a witness. N.C. Gen. Stat. It is generally recognized that an examining counsel should not ask his own witness leading questions on direct examination. The purpose of the general rule is to prevent counsel from suggesting the desired answer to an eager, friendly witness. In the present case, defendant called Phyllis Gibson as a witness in an effort to show that the victim had made a prior inconsistent statement about defendant's use of a knife.