State v. E.M.

The State argues that the trial court erred in granting E.M.’s motion in limine to exclude his statements to school officials and determining that its ruling was dispos-itive. We agree the trial court erred in granting the motion in limine and reverse and remand for further proceedings. Because we agree that the trial court erred in granting E.M.’s motion in limine, the issue of whether the trial court’s ruling was dispositive is moot.

E.M., a student at a middle school, was given an internal suspension for violating of the school’s dress code. E.M. told a member of the school security staff…