From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Ritenour

Court of Appeals of Iowa.
Jun 15, 2016
885 N.W.2d 219 (Iowa Ct. App. 2016)

Summary

holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in disallowing evidence "[g]iven the minimal information provided in the offer of proof"

Summary of this case from Hyten v. HNI Corp.

Opinion

No. 15–0038.

06-15-2016

STATE of Iowa, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Alicia RITENOUR, Defendant–Appellant.

Mark C. Smith, State Appellate Defender, and Vidhya K. Reddy, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Kyle P. Hanson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.


DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Ritenour

Court of Appeals of Iowa.
Jun 15, 2016
885 N.W.2d 219 (Iowa Ct. App. 2016)

holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in disallowing evidence "[g]iven the minimal information provided in the offer of proof"

Summary of this case from Hyten v. HNI Corp.
Case details for

State v. Ritenour

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Iowa, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Alicia RITENOUR, Defendant–Appellant.

Court:Court of Appeals of Iowa.

Date published: Jun 15, 2016

Citations

885 N.W.2d 219 (Iowa Ct. App. 2016)

Citing Cases

State v. Henderson

The testimony did not improperly speak to Henderson's credibility or the ultimate issue of Henderson's guilt.…

Moore v. Wachtendorf

The officer testified as a fact witness based on his personal observations made during the course of his…