Court Opinion

ID: 8294902
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-17 11:01:01.474757+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:44:00.025409
License: Public Domain

LOCKEMY, J.,
concurring.
I concur in result only. I would hold that limiting Bray-boy’s ability to question Turner, one of only two witnesses testifying against him, about Turner’s sawed-off shotgun conviction was a violation of Rule 609(a)(1), SCRE, and was error. Furthermore, I do not agree with the majority’s determination that the trial court conducted a Rule 403, SCRE, balancing test. In my view, after a proper Rule 403, SCRE, analysis, Brayboy should have been permitted to introduce Turner’s shotgun conviction into evidence. Additionally, I am concerned Brayboy’s inability to cross-examine Turner regarding his conviction for possession of a sawed-off shotgun is a violation of the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. However, I agree with the majority that any error by the trial court was harmless because Turner was impeached with multiple convictions, and Brown testified Brayboy was the third perpetrator. For these reasons, I respectfully concur in result only.