Opinion ID: 1540179
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Trial Judge Properly Allowed Rebuttal Evidence.

Text: Campbell argues that the trial judge allowed the State to argue improper rebuttal testimony about GPS tracking evidence. We review whether the trial judge admitted rebuttal testimony improperly under an abuse of discretion standard of review. [83] The trial judge has discretion to craft the order in which the parties present evidence  and thus, the proof  at trial. [84] To that end, it is entirely proper for the affirmative side to give evidence in rebuttal in reply to the evidence of the other side of the case. [85] Campbell complains that Detective Chorlton's testimony had no purpose other than to rebut an exhibit that Campbell's counsel presented during the State's case-in-chief. Campbell claims that this alleged rebuttal testimony was merely to bolster the State's case. Campbell argues that the fact that Campbell introduced a defense exhibit during the State's case bars the State from rebutting that exhibit's significance. Campbell overlooks that he introduced the impeaching evidence when, on cross examination, Morales testified that the middle of the area indicated on the GPS printout between 980 and 1099 Port Penn Road appeared more than a mile from Campbell's house at 1 Liberty Street. Campbell ignores that he cross examined Morales, who acknowledged on cross that he could not think of a reason to stop on that Port Penn block. Campbell opened the door for rebuttal with this impeaching testimony about Morales' whereabouts on October 26. Then, Campbell testified that Morales did not come to his house that day. To rebut Campbell's exhibit, the State called Detective Chorlton. Detective Chorlton rebutted Defense Exhibit 2, the Google map, with State Exhibit 5, showing MapQuest's result typing in the GPS coordinates. The trial judge properly allowed the rebuttal testimony and did not abuse his discretion.