Court Opinion

ID: 9671747
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:42:50.423325+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:11.811825
License: Public Domain

SABERS, Justice
(concurring specially).
I concur with the majority in the result and write specially to point out the following:
One of the State’s witnesses, Linda Rich Ackfield, testified at trial that she saw defendant Andrews strike McCloskey, yet she was properly impeached with her own prior preliminary hearing statement that she only saw Doyle strike McCloskey and herself.
Under Instruction # 14, the jury was told that they must not consider any such prior statement as establishing the truth of any matter contained in that statement. Instruction # 14 implied to the jury that they should not take the prior statement as true and only look for truth in what was presented at trial, i.e., that the witness did see Andrews strike the victim.
Defendant objected to Instruction # 141 and also sought to replace the last sentence thereof with the last sentence of his own proposed instruction #3.2 The proposed substitution was proper and it would have been better practice on the part of the trial court to have given it. However, it is questionable whether the trial court’s refusal to give it constitutes error. At any rate, it did not constitute reversible error in view of all of the other witnesses who independently identified Andrews as striking and beating upon McCloskey.

. Instruction # 14 is set forth in full in the majority opinion on page 80.

. Instruction #3 is set forth in full in the majority opinion on page 81.