Opinion ID: 2590173
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Questions asked by the State implying witness intimidation:

Text: The defendant argues that the State, by its questions on crossexamination, improperly implied that Griffin had been threatened into changing his testimony at trial. The defendant contends that there was no evidence of such intimidation and, thus, the State's reference to it was improper and denied him his right to a fair trial. When Griffin took the stand at trial, his testimony differed remarkably from his earlier statement to police. Rather than being inculpatory, his testimony on the stand minimized the involvement of the defendant in the shooting. In an effort to explain this change in testimony, the State asked the following questions: [State]: Mr. Griffin, have you ever been threatened about your testimony before in this case? [Griffin]: No. [State]: Have you ever been intimidated where you felt you were intimidated about your testimony before in this case. [Griffin]: No. [State]: Have you everever filed a police report in Kansas City, Missouri regarding anyone in this case? [Griffin]: No. [State]: Never filed a police report? [Griffin]: Who? [State]: You, did you ever cause a police report to be filed? [Griffin]: Nah. [State]: You ever file a police report in regard to an Ed Moore? [Griffin]: No. Who is that? [State]: Did you ever discuss with Detective Shomin someone intimidating you? [Griffin]: No. [State]: Did you ever discuss with Detective Shomin an Ed Moore? [Griffin]: Nah. The State, later realizing that it had mistakenly used the name Ed Moore instead of Ed Booth, continued questioning: [State]: And after the preliminary hearing, did you have a conversation with Mr. Booth? [Griffin]: No. [State]: Didn't talk to Mr. Booth at all? [Griffin]: No. [State]: Did you ever file a police report or talk to a police officer in Kansas City, Missouri in regard to Mr. Booth? [Griffin]: No. [State]: Mr. Booth ever make any statements to you? [Griffin]: All I knowall I know he was playing on the phone and my mother told me. [State]: Who was playing on the phone? [Griffin]: Edward Booth was. [State]: And the phone at your house? [Griffin]: Yeah. The defendant also complains of the following cross-examination of Edward Booth, a friend of both Griffin and the defendant: [State]: As a matter of fact, those conversations you had that you and he discussed it was where the first time before prelim you went to him asking him to change his story, isn't it? [Booth]: No. [State]: And the second conversation you had with him was after prelim when you confronted him and said, is that the best you could do? [Booth]: No. .... [State]: Did you try to help him with what the truth was? [Booth]: Excuse me? [State]: Did you try to help him with what the truth was? [Booth]: No. The defendant is correct in his claim that a prosecutor may not make assertions of fact in the form of questions to a witness absent a good faith basis for believing the asserted matters to be true. State v. Cravatt, 267 Kan. 314, 330, 979 P.2d 679 (1999). If however, there is a good faith basis for believing the asserted matters to be true, such questions constitute appropriate cross-examination. In this case, the defendant failed to object to any of the questions asked by the prosecution. A trial objection on the precise grounds the defendant now raises would generally require the prosecutor to proffer a basis for the disputed questions and provide this court with a record to review. Absent such an objection, the issue may not be considered. Cravatt, 267 Kan. at 330. Moreover, there is evidence in the record that the State did have a good faith basis for its line of questioning, at least for Griffin's testimony. In his own testimony, Griffin acknowledged that his mother had contacted police about a threatening telephone call from his friend Edward Booth although Griffin testified at the trial that the call was just a joke. Detective Shomin testified that after the preliminary hearing, Griffin told him that he had been walking down the street when someone shot at him and he thought it was related to his possible testimony. Shomin also testified that the Kansas City, Missouri, police department notified him that they had responded to Griffin's residence in regard to some threatening telephone calls.