Opinion ID: 2275549
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Excluded Witnesses

Text: For his second point on appeal, Mr. Woods argues that the trial court erred by refusing to allow him to call two witnesses. The trial court excluded the testimony of Mr. Edgar Goshen and Mr. Ricky Akins because Mr. Woods failed to notify the State about these witnesses before the day of trial. Mr. Woods argues that the trial court acted unfairly in excluding these witnesses, since defense counsel did not see the State's full witness list until the morning of trial. We are unable to reach the merits of this issue. Where error is assigned in the refusal of the court to hear the testimony of a witness, the record must disclose the substance or purport of the offered testimony, so that this court may determine whether or not its rejection was prejudicial. Allen v. State, 324 Ark. 1, 918 S.W.2d 699 (1996); Ark. R. Evid. 103(a)(2). In the instant case, there was no proffer of what the two witnesses' testimony would have been. In fact, in a rather perplexing response to the State's argument pointing out the failure to proffer, Mr. Woods proclaims in his own reply brief that the two (2) defense rebuttal witnesses never testified at all. No discussion is of record showing any effort to have the jury leave the Courtroom while the Court, without the jury present, heard the testimonies of the two (2) witnesses. No proffer having been made, we cannot address the exclusion of the testimony of Mr. Goshen and Mr. Akins.