Opinion ID: 1784340
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Third Alleged Error

Text: Finally, Holland asked Boyer to testify about a wager which Anderson allegedly made with a friend known as Louie. Anderson allegedly bet that he would sleep with Krystal before Louie would sleep with a girl known as Deedee. Holland asked this question because he again wanted to raise the possibility that Anderson (and not Holland) may have had sex with Krystal on the night of the murder. The State objected. The judge sustained the objection after characterizing the testimony which Holland attempted to elicit as inadmissible hearsay. Vol. X, at 1610-14. Whether the testimony would constitute inadmissible hearsay is an issue which this Court need not address. The judge's decision is affirmed on the bases discussed in the preceding sections. In other words, the testimony would have been irrelevant pursuant to Rule 401 and common sense.