Opinion ID: 2016221
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: collateral testimony of specific acts

Text: Appellant next contends that he should have been allowed to depose the principal of B.W.'s grade school and should have been allowed discovery of an exculpatory nature regarding an incident surrounding a missing watch and B.W.'s alleged untruthfulness regarding the watch's whereabouts. The court denied the request, finding that the material sought was related to a collateral issue, a specific incident of alleged dishonesty, and improper for impeachment purposes. The court has the discretion to order depositions in criminal cases if the information may affect the outcome of the trial. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-1917 (Reissue 1989). See, also, State v. Tuttle, 238 Neb. 827, 472 N.W.2d 712 (1991); State v. Brown, 214 Neb. 665, 675, 335 N.W.2d 542 (1983). This line of discovery not only is clearly collateral to the criminal behavior at hand, but does nothing to exculpate the appellant. The request was correctly denied. We find no abuse of discretion, and thus the assignment is without merit.