Opinion ID: 2581358
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Leroy Lane

Text: Potential prosecution witness Leroy Lane gave two statements to the police. The prosecution provided the defense with a tape recording of Lane's May 10, 1994 interview. Shortly before Lane was scheduled to testify, the prosecutor discovered and disclosed a tape recording of an earlier phone conversation between a police detective and Lane on April 8, 1994. The prosecutor sought to introduce Lane's testimony about a debt defendant believed he was owed by victim Sadler, contending that the debt gave defendant a motive to kill Sadler. The defense moved to exclude Lane's testimony at trial, arguing that Lane would testify that he had satisfied Sadler's debt by repaying defendant what Sadler owed defendant several months before Sadler was killed. Out of the jury's presence Lane took the stand, testified for the prosecution, and was cross-examined by the defense; the trial court then excluded Lane's testimony, finding the debt evidence temporally too remote to provide a motive for Sadler's murder. Because Lane did not testify at trial, the belated disclosure of the April 8, 1994 taped conversation that might have impeached his testimony cannot have prejudiced defendant in any way.