Opinion ID: 1798829
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: it was error to admit the testimony of witness chantina ginn.

Text: During the testimony by this witness the state elicited from her the following: Lorili asked Rick how he liked the way Damon worked, and Rick didn't make any reply. When the above answer was given, a proper foundation had not been established. However, immediately, during the time appellant was objecting, the state elicited additional testimony from the witness that all four of them were present. The state's attorney asked a leading question and in effect testified. This was error but it was not prejudicial. Such matters are best handled by the trial court at the time of the improper statement or question. There was no request by the appellant to strike this testimony nor that the jury be admonished. Therefore, we will not consider it on appeal. Gruzen v. State, 267 Ark. 380, 591 S.W.2d 342 (1979).