Opinion ID: 1711914
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Tony Bass

Text: Tony Bass testified regarding conversations he had with Harris. The State asked Tony Bass whether Harris told Tony Bass about other things besides the murder of Jones. The State elicited testimony that Harris told Tony Bass about other things that involved Corey Bass and that Corey Bass was involved in drug sales. Harris objected based on a [m]otion in limine previously filed and the Court's 402. The objection was overruled. It should be noted that the record shows 14 pretrial motions that were made at a hearing on August 18, 1997. Among those motions was a motion based on § 27-404; a motion evidently based on Neb. Evid. R. 608, Neb.Rev.Stat. § 27-608 (Reissue 1995); a motion in limine relating to the subornation of perjury; and a motion in limine relating to the use of Homicide as Hicks' nickname. In addition, motions in limine were argued on July 19, 1999, relating to the mention of gang activity, Harris' statements to Sklenar, and the unavailability of certain witnesses. The record does not indicate to which motion in limine defense counsel was referring when objecting to Tony Bass' statement. Because Harris' objection does not identify § 27-404(2) as the basis for the objection, Harris cannot assert that ground for the objection on appeal. Harris' general objection based on the motion in limine does not identify which of the many previously filed motions provided the purported basis for Harris' objection. A true objection does not wander among the Nebraska Evidence Rules in the hope of eventually ending its odyssey at the doorstep of a particular rule of evidence. In seeking to exclude evidence, counsel must adhere to a basic and straightforward approach: Tell the court the reason why the evidence is inadmissible. State v. Fahlk, 246 Neb. 834, 524 N.W.2d 39 (1994). Furthermore, as with Sklenar's testimony above, Tony Bass' testimony established only that Harris told Tony Bass about other things involving Corey Bass, presumably Corey Bass' drug sales. This testimony did not establish any crimes, wrongs, or acts on Harris' part within the meaning of § 27-404(2) and was not inadmissible on that basis.