Opinion ID: 2149090
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Ulterior Motives of Witnesses

Text: Griffin claims that the testimony of Edna and Jerry Davis should be discounted because they had ulterior motives. Jerry Davis admitted during cross-examination that he was angry with defendant's brother, Charles Griffin, because Charles dated his sister while married to another woman. The Davis' testimony served to refute appellant's alibi defense and to implicate appellant in the robbery. Both Edna and Jerry Davis identified appellant in court as the man who was at their home on the day of the robbery. During cross-examination, Jerry admitted that he had a close relationship with his sister and that he did not like to see anyone hurt her. However, admitting that he would like the chance for retribution against Charles Griffin, he stated that he would not seek it through his brother and that he harbored no animosity toward the defendant. Moreover, Jerry gave a statement consistent with his courtroom testimony prior to learning that Charles Griffin was married while dating his sister. When a jury is aware of a witness' possible motives or bias, it can use the information to assess the witness' credibility. Shields v. State (1986), Ind., 490 N.E.2d 292.