Opinion ID: 1724055
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: evidence of details of prior difficulty

Text: Thompson's argument about the trial judge's refusal to permit testimony showing that Clayburn had resumed a previous difficulty his relatives had with Thompson is without foundation because: (a) No proffer of the excluded testimony was made by Thompson in order to preserve the point for appeal; (b) Thompson already had before the court and jury testimony showing (1) that one of Clayburn's relatives had cut his throat, (2) that conflict existed between Thompson and Clayburn's cousins, and (3) that Clayburn had threatened to shoot Thompson. We adhere to the rule that a record proffer of excluded testimony must be made to preserve the point for appeal. Gates v. State, 484 So.2d 1002, 1008 (Miss. 1986). Also, ample evidence of the prior difficulty between Thompson and Clayburn's relatives, as well as the threat made by Clayburn, were already before the jury. Details of the previous difficulty were not admissible. Ladner v. State, 197 So.2d 257, 263 (Miss. 1967); Hardy v. State, 143 Miss. 352, 108 So. 727 (1926). This assignment of error is without merit.