#MIKE DOWNIMG CASPER WY TRIAL#

Prior conduct, which conduct was relevant to the cause of the accident and to Probative value,' had not allowed Edwards to produce evidence of the victim's In Edwards, 2007 WY 146, ¶¶ 5, 10, 167 P.3dĪt 637, 639, we reversed an aggravated vehicular homicide conviction because theĭistrict court, on the ground that the evidence was 'distracting and of little Prevent a criminal defendant from presenting a defense. That affected the CI's credibility, and violated this Court's prior rulings,ĭiscussed below, wherein we held that W.R.E. Rulings prevented the jury from hearing relevant evidence of his theory ofĭefense that the CI was 'conning' DCI, prevented the jury from hearing evidence

#MIKE DOWNIMG CASPER WY TRIAL#

Motion seeking discovery of 'other buys' in which the CI participated, and byĮxcluding at trial evidence of other such buys. 2006)).Īlleges that the district court abused its discretion by denying his pretrial In the absence of an abuse ofĭiscretion, we will not disturb the trial court's determination. Many things, among which are conclusions drawn from objective criteria it meansĮxercising sound judgment with regard to what is right under the circumstancesĪnd without doing so arbitrarily or capriciously. Of the reasonableness of the trial court's choice. Have described the standard of an abuse of discretion as reaching the question Trial court's determination of the admissibility of evidence unless that court Not recovered because a search warrant was not immediatelyĬourt's evidentiary rulings are reviewed on appeal under the followingĮvidentiary rulings are within the sound discretion of the trial courtĪnd include determinations of the adequacy of foundation and relevancy,Ĭompetency, materiality, and remoteness of the evidence. Was 'wired' during the transaction, but background noise diminished the quality The appellant in exchange for 18 morphine pills. Money' and driven to JC's house, where the CI allegedly gave the buy money to

Support of the appellant's theory of the case?Ģ008, a confidential informant (the CI) working with the Wyoming Division ofĬriminal Investigation (DCI), made a recorded telephone call to the appellant toĪrrange the illegal purchase of morphine pills. Producing evidence attacking the credibility of a confidential informant in The district court abuse its discretion in prohibiting the appellant from Presented ten issues for our review, but we will address only the single issue Now appeals that conviction, challenging several district court rulings and theĬompetence of defense counsel, and alleging prosecutorial misconduct, as well as Trial, the appellant was convicted of one count of unlawful delivery of a KITE, C.J., and GOLDEN, HILL, VOIGT, and BURKE,

Michael Pauling, Senior Assistant Attorney General Leda M. Salzburg, Wyoming Attorney General Terry L. Sandefer of Krampner, Fuller & Associates, L.L.C.,Ī. Readers are requested to notify the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Supreme Court Building, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002, of any typographical or other formal errors so that correction may be made before final publication in the permanent volume.įrom the District Court of Natrona County NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in Pacific Reporter Third.

Mike downimg casper wy