King v. State

2 Citing cases

  1. Heglemeier v. State

    110 Nev. 806 (Nev. 1994)   Cited 1 times

    It is permissible for the State to cross-examine witnesses on matters concerning bias, hostility, and prejudice. In concluding that the State may properly cross-examine an alibi witness concerning his or her failure to contact police before the trial, the court in King v. State, 748 P.2d 531, 535 (Okla.Crim.App. 1988), reasoned that cross-examination should be allowed in matters which tend to contradict, explain or discredit a witness's testimony or verify accuracy, memory, veracity or credibility. We agree and conclude that there was no error in connection with the State's cross-examination of Heglemeier's alibi witnesses.

  2. Guy v. State

    778 P.2d 470 (Okla. Crim. App. 1989)   Cited 14 times
    In Guy v. State, 1989 OK CR 35, ΒΆ 25, 778 P.2d 470, 476, we recognized the above factors but for purposes of that appeal, assumed without further discussion that the appellant had made out a prima facie case of discrimination and discussed in depth the second step of Batson.

    We are convinced after having reviewed the record that none of the allegedly improper remarks were sufficiently prejudicial to warrant reversal or modification. See King v. State, 748 P.2d 531, 535 (Okla. Cr. 1988). Appellant's fifth proposition is therefore denied.