Court Opinion

ID: 9862037
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 00:58:38.050561+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:29:57.321403
License: Public Domain

KRAHULIK, Justice,
dissenting.
I agree with the majority that retroactive application of Cruz v. New York (1987), 481 U.S. 186, 107 S.Ct. 1714, 95 L.Ed.2d 162, and Richardson v. Marsh (1987), 481 U.S. 200, 107 S.Ct. 1702, 95 L.Ed.2d 176, results in the determination that the trial court committed error in failing to instruct the jury that McCall's confession should apply to McCall only. However, my review of the redacted statement leads me to conclude that the weight of such statement was minuscule, at most, in comparison to the heavy weight of the live testimony of other witnesses. I, therefore, do not believe that there is a reasonable possibility that the redacted confession of McCall contributed to Taggart's conviction. Thus, I conclude that the admission into evidence of this confession was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and, consequently, would affirm Taggart's conviction.
GIVAN, J., concurs in result.