Opinion ID: 1135841
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Use of leading questions

Text: Hedlund complains of two specific instances in which he claims the prosecutor was improperly allowed to ask leading questions. Hedlund contends the court allowed leading questions on direct examination, thereby violating his rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The specific complaints stem from the following testimony at trial: Q. [PROSECUTOR] Did you see anything else in the trunk? A. [LEMON] No, not that I can recall. Q. Did you see at any time Mike Hedlund's .22 rifle? MR. LEANDER: Your Honor, again, leading. He said he didn't see anything in the trunk. THE COURT: The objection is overruled. You can answer. THE WITNESS: At any time? Q. That evening when you looked into the trunk. A. No, I don't recall. ..... Q. [PROSECUTOR] When you were around Michael Hedlund after Christene Mertens was killed, did Michael Hedlund appear to be slightly more aggressive towards you or Chris [Morris]? MR. LEANDER: Objection your Honor, leading. Prosecutor can ask how he acted. THE COURT: The objection is overruled. You can answer. THE WITNESS: No, not that I can recall. He acted like, like he wasn't nice, as nice to us anymore, like, but he wasn't aggressive. Hedlund has not demonstrated that the questions he complains of are leading. Leading question are those suggesting the desired answers. See MODEL CODE OF EVIDENCE, Rule 105 (A.L.I. 1942); MORRIS K. UDALL ET AL., ARIZONA EVIDENCE § 33 (3d ed. 1991). An example of such a question would be The cat was black, wasn't it? State v. Agnew, 132 Ariz. 567, 577, 647 P.2d 1165, 1175 (App. 1982). This court has stated that the general rule is that questions that put the answer into the mouth of one's witness in chief should not be asked. Ball v. State, 43 Ariz. 556, 558, 33 P.2d 601, 602 (1934) (emphasis added). As UDALL notes, [w]hat is desired is that the trier hear what the witness perceived, not the acquiescence of the witness in counsel's interpretation of what he perceived. UDALL, supra § 33, at 55. Obviously, from the questions asked of Lemon, counsel sought to elicit yes or no answers. However, a question is not leading just because the answer is obvious. Agnew, 132 Ariz. at 577, 647 P.2d at 1175. Counsel did not suggest what the answers should be; therefore, the questions were not leading. Furthermore, even if the questions were leading, Lemon's answers were favorable to Hedlund, as he testified that he did not see the rifle and that Hedlund was not aggressive. Any error was therefore harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.