Opinion ID: 1766558
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Admission of Perry Taylor's Statement

Text: Taylor alleges the trial court erred and abused its discretion in overruling the motion to exclude Perry Taylor's redacted statement. Taylor alleges that the detective's statements vouched for Perry's credibility and invaded the province of the jury.
On December 8, 2004, Perry Taylor, Taylor's brother, was taken into custody and questioned regarding allegations against his brother. During this interrogation, Perry told the detectives that Taylor had called him and admitted to murdering Rowe and her children. At trial, the State called Perry as a witness. When questioned about his statement during the interrogation, Perry stated that he did not recall the events. The State then told Perry, I'm going to ask you basically these questions that were asked of you that night and your responses; you can tell me if they're true or not, okay? The State read the following portions of Perry's statement: SPEAKER TWO [Detective]: Right. But you didn't do it? PERRY TAYLOR: No, I didn't have anything to do with it. SPEAKER TWO: Right. The State asked if this statement was correct, and Perry replied, [t]hat would not be correct. Taylor objected to the statements in a pre-trial motion and at trial on grounds that the detective expressed an opinion. The trial court overruled the objection, finding the statement was not expressing an opinion but asking a question. The detective who conducted the interview also testified. The following portion of Taylor's statement was read into evidence: SPEAKER TWO [Detective]: Because he had already told you before Thanksgiving what had happened, right? PERRY TAYLOR: Yeah. SPEAKER TWO: Was that the day before? Two days before? PERRY TAYLOR: He probably told me thatwell, I want to say the day before Thanksgiving. SPEAKER TWO: So the day before Thanksgiving PERRY TAYLOR: I'm thinking, I'm not even sure about that, I think so. SPEAKER TWO: Okay, I think you're right. Taylor again objected on the grounds that the detective expressed an opinion, which the court overruled.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting Perry's statement. The detective's statements of right and I think you're right are not opinion statements. The detective made these statements in the course of a police interrogation and given this context, it is reasonable to assume that the detective used these words and phrases simply to acknowledge what Perry had said and for him to continue answering the detective's questions. These statements did not express an opinion regarding the Perry's credibility or innocence. [12] They were only a pattern of speech. Furthermore, the State offered these portions of the police interrogation for Perry's statements, not for the detective's statements. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the detective's statements. Point eight is denied.