Opinion ID: 1908635
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Admitting the Grand Jury Testimony of Landon's Grandmother.

Text: Landon also contends that the trial court committed reversible error when it allowed the government to impeach one of its own witnesses, Grace Keys, with her grand jury testimony. Keys is Landon's grandmother. At the grand jury proceedings, Keys had testified that Landon told her, I was in the car, but when the gun went off, I jumped out and ran. Keys had specified that [h]e was in this Chevrolet car; the Blazer was manufactured by Chevrolet. At trial, however, Keys testified that she visited Landon after his arrest and that he had an alibi: I didn't do it ... because I wasn't there. The government claimed surprise at this change in Keys's narrative and requested permission to impeach her with her grand jury testimony. Landon objected that any surprise did not affirmatively damage the government's case and therefore impeachment would be inappropriate. The trial court ruled that the prosecutor could impeach the witness with the grand jury testimony because, among other things, there are obviously certain exculpatory statements made, too. Whether to allow a party to impeach its own witnesses on a claim of surprise is committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge, whose ruling will not be reversed unless it lacks any rational basis. See Sterling, supra, 691 A.2d at 133. The party claiming surprise must demonstrate that the unexpected testimony affirmatively damages its case and that impeachment is necessary to neutralize such damage. See Hawkins v. United States, 606 A.2d 753, 758 (D.C.1992). We have upheld a trial court's determination of affirmative damage in this context when the witness' testimony has tended to injure or destroy the party's case. Id. As already noted, the government's case was strengthened by placing Landon in the Blazer. The grandmother's surprise trial testimony thus became exculpatory evidence, an alibi. See Byers v. United States, 649 A.2d 279, 284-85 (D.C.1994). Such testimony from a witness called by the government was particularly harmful. Id. at 285. We see no abuse of discretion in admitting the grand jury testimony for impeachment purposes. [24]