Opinion ID: 3006428
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: January 13 to January 16

Text: For his second point on appeal, Griffin argues that the circuit court erred by limiting French’s testimony to the events that occurred on the afternoon of January 16, 2013. Griffin sought to elicit testimony describing the victim’s and Griffin’s activities from January 13, 2013, after the victim arrived at French and Griffin’s residence, to the time of the shooting on January 16, 2013. Griffin sought this testimony to demonstrate the human element of the crime scene; to attempt to show the common conduct between Griffin and the victim; and to provide the reason and basis for the incident. In response, the State contends that we 10 Cite as 2015 Ark. 340 should decline to consider Griffin’s argument because Griffin failed to proffer the evidence he sought to have admitted. Here, based on the record before us, Griffin failed to proffer the excluded evidence to the circuit court. When evidence is excluded by the circuit court, the party challenging that decision must make a proffer of the excluded evidence at trial so that this court can review the decision, unless the substance of the evidence is apparent from the context. Arnett v. State, 353 Ark. 165, 173, 122 S.W.3d 484, 489 (2003) (citing Thomas v. State, 349 Ark. 447, 79 S.W.3d 347 (2002)). Thus, we hold that, without the proffer, Griffin has failed to preserve his argument regarding the evidence he sought to admit, and we affirm the circuit court on this point.