Opinion ID: 2222135
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: other witnesses and evidence

Text: Various other witnesses testified for the State, and Cook offered other testimony and evidence in his defense. Additional evidence and testimony which relates to Cook's assignments of error on appeal will be related here. Immediately after Hornbacher testified at trial, the State called Childs as a witness. She testified similarly to Hornbacher and Cook regarding the events of April 28, 2000. In addition, she testified that Hornbacher got home at around 12:50 a.m. and did not go out again. Childs also testified that after Hornbacher met with Cook the following day, he came home and told her that Cook had told Hornbacher that the night before, Cook had had consensual sex with a woman and thereafter shot her. In most respects, Childs' version of Cook's statements was similar to Hornbacher's testimony. The State also presented the testimony of Amy Hoffmeyer. Hoffmeyer worked with Childs and played volleyball with her at McCormack's on April 28, 2000. After volleyball, Hoffmeyer remained at McCormack's, socializing with various people including Hornbacher and Cook. Hoffmeyer testified that as she was putting her keys into the ignition of her car after leaving the bar, Cook knocked on the window. He told her he wanted her to come back into the bar to get to know him better. She said no, but Cook persisted with his requests, at one point reaching into the car to put his hand on her shoulder. She mentioned that she knew he was married but that he said he did not care. Cook eventually gave up, and she drove home. On cross-examination, Hoffmeyer testified that she had not felt threatened by Cook, she just thought it odd that he wanted to get to know her better considering that he was married. Before Cook testified in his defense, a hearing was held outside the presence of the jury in which Cook's attorney said he anticipated that the State would cross-examine Cook about an incident with a woman named Yvette that occurred at McCormack's on the evening of April 28, 2000. In the hearing, it was stated that a woman named Yvette Carmen had told friends that while she was on her way to the bathroom, Cook had grabbed her, took her to the parking lot, started to kiss her, and put his hand down her pants. Cook also apparently tried to get her into his truck. Cook's attorney wanted to get any such question prohibited as improper prior bad acts evidence. The State argued the evidence was offered for the purpose of showing Cook's intent to get a woman into his truck to have sex. After much discussion, the district court stated, The sexual acts is [sic] 403. The other, getting into the truck, I'll just rule when the time comes. See Neb.Rev.Stat. § 27-403 (Reissue 1995). During cross-examination, the State asked Cook to tell about the incident where he followed Hoffmeyer outside to her car. After Cook told his side of the story, the State asked about a subsequent time that evening that Cook had gone out to the parking lot. Cook said that he had gone outside to get some fresh air and that [s]omeone did come outside with me, but I did not ask them [sic] to come outside with me. Upon further questioning, Cook stated that he did not know the person's name but that the person was female. The State asked what Cook and the female did in the parking lot, and Cook stated, Weagain, we talked, and we kissed and that was it. We were out there for less than five minutes and came back in. Throughout this questioning, Cook's attorney objected on the basis of relevance and the district court overruled the objections. Finally, the State asked, Did you ask her to get in your truck with her [sic]? Cook's attorney then objected, and the court sustained the objection. The State then moved on to a different line of questioning. Jeanette testified for the State regarding, inter alia, her interaction with Cook on April 29, 2000, the day following the killing of Stahlecker. During cross-examination, Cook's attorney asked whether at about 12:30 p.m. of that day she had gone to study but had instead written a letter to Cook. She said that she had. When Cook's attorney began to question Jeanette further about the letter, the State objected on the basis of hearsay and relevance. During a side-bar conference, it was stated that the letter was never given to Cook and that instead Jeanette had given it to the defense attorney some time after Cook's arrest. The court sustained the hearsay objection but allowed Cook to make an offer of proof of the letter. In the letter, Jeanette expressed that she was angry with Cook for having been out late with Hornbacher the night before. She also expressed her ongoing dissatisfaction related to Cook's friendship with Hornbacher and recounted various incidents in which she thought Hornbacher had a negative influence on Cook, including incidents in which Cook covered for Hornbacher because he was cheating on his girl friend. Jeanette expressed her desire that Cook not allow his friendship with Hornbacher to affect his relationship with her. Charles O'Callaghan, an investigator for the Nebraska State Patrol, testified for the State regarding the investigation of Stahlecker's killing. During cross-examination, defense counsel asked whether O'Callaghan had executed a search warrant on Hornbacher's residence, and O'Callaghan replied that he had not. On redirect, in reference to the testimony that investigators had not searched Hornbacher's residence, the prosecutor elicited testimony that in order to get a search warrant, investigators must have probable cause that the person committed a crime. The prosecutor asked O'Callaghan, At any point in time in this investigation, did you have probable cause that Mike Hornbacher committed any crime? O'Callaghan replied, No. Michael Auten, a state patrol forensic chemist, testified for the State. Defense counsel elicited testimony from Auten that if ordered to do so, Auten could test the clothes worn by Hornbacher on the night of the killing to test for comparison to fibers found in Cook's truck and on Stahlecker's clothing. In a side-bar conference, defense counsel moved for an order for production of Hornbacher's clothing for fiber analysis. The court denied the motion, and defense counsel did not pursue the issue further. During Hornbacher's testimony, on cross-examination, the following exchange occurred between defense counsel and Hornbacher: [Defense counsel:] You had never known ... Cook to be violent with a woman before, did you, sir? [Hornbacher:] Not until after this trial started. [Defense counsel:] And [Hornbacher:] I take that back. I do. [Defense counsel:] Excuse me, sir. At the time that you gave this statement on May 10th, did you indicate that you had never seen him do that to a woman? [Hornbacher:] I've never seen him do it to a woman, no. Defense counsel then moved on to other questioning.