Court Opinion

ID: 9849336
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:38:30.756945+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:18.000017
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
The state argues that the trial court’s failure to allow the defendant’s expert to examine the paint samples (Division 6) was harmless error in this case because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming. The evidence against the defendant was circumstantial and it included the testimony of the state’s expert that the samples taken from the defendant and from the Capitol “could have had a common origin.” The state relied upon expert evidence on this topic and the defendant was entitled to have an expert of his choosing examine the evidence as set forth in Division 6.

Motion for rehearing denied.

All the Justices concur, except Jordan, C. J., who dissents.