Opinion ID: 2104779
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Testimony Elicited on Redirect Examination

Text: The defendant argues that the testimony elicited in support of count 4 was improperly admitted because it was brought forth on redirect examination, was not within the scope of cross-examination, and was produced by leading questions. Actually defendant's argument related to counts 2 and 3 as well, but since they have been dismissed on other grounds, the argument now relates only to count 4. We are of the opinion that this argument must fail since we believe after examination of the record that the redirect examination was within the scope of the cross-examination. Consequently the trial justice did not abuse his discretion in allowing the exploration of these issues. See State v. Burke, 529 A.2d 621 (R.I. 1987). We believe further that the questions were not leading as that term is defined in State v. Girouard, 561 A.2d 882 (R.I. 1989). Therefore, defendant's argument on this issue is unavailing.