Pryor v. State
Court of Appeals of Arkansas
1DissentSam Bird, Judge
I believe that this case should be affirmed because Pryor did not proffer the testimony that he argues was erroneously excluded and, therefore, has not preserved for appeal the issue upon which the majority relies in reversing and remanding.
The majority has reversed and remanded this case, agreeing with Pryor’s argument that the trial court erred in failing to permit him to introduce into evidence, through the testimony of Robert Willis, an alleged prior inconsistent statement of Jeffrey Hubbard. Although I agree that Pryor should have been permitted to introduce the prior inconsistent…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Byrd v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
- Abernathy v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1996
- Bell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1996
- Davis v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1995
- Billett v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.