State v. Wright

The question before us in this case is the extent of the trial court’s discretion under Evid. R. 609. We, therefore, must construe Evid. R. 609 in light of Evid. R. 403.

In ruling on the appellee’s request to exclude all testimony relating to his prior convictions, the trial court was concerned with the scope of discretion it possessed under Evid. R. 609. 1 We glean from the trial court’s statements that it was unsure as to the ambit of this discretion.

*7Pursuant to the trial court’s ruling, the prosecutor proceeded on cross-examination to question both appellee and appellee’s character witness…