State v. Gilmore

The issue presented in this case is whether a proffer of excluded evidence is required in every situation to preserve, for appellate review, an evidentiary ruling which is alleged to be in error. We answer in the negative.

Evid. R. 103 provides, in pertinent part:

“(A) Effect of erroneous ruling. Error may not be predicated upon a ruling which admits or excludes evidence unless a substantial right of the party is affected, and

“(2) Offer of proof. In case the ruling is one excluding evidence, the substance of the evidence was made known to the court by offer or was apparent from the context…