Padilla v. State
Supreme Court of Wyoming
601 P.2d 189 (Wyo. 1979)
Relevant factsFree
During cross-examination at his sexual-assault trial, Padilla (defendant) began questioning the victim about her prior preliminary-hearing testimony regarding whether she knew him, but the prosecution objected on the ground that a transcript should be used instead, and the trial court sustained the objection; Padilla made no further offer of proof and moved on. After his conviction, Padilla appealed, arguing the objection should not have been sustained because his question alone made his impeachment purpose clear.
IssueFree
Whether an offer of proof is generally necessary to preserve an evidentiary issue for appeal.