State v. Taft

OPINION ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

The appellee was charged with aggravated sexual assault. His first trial ended in a mistrial because of a hung jury. Prior to retrial, the trial court granted the “Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Oral Statements” on the ground that they were more prejudicial than probative. See Rule of Criminal Evidence 403. The State appealed the trial court’s decision to the Court of Appeals, contending that the trial court erred in “excluding” the evidence of the appellee’s statements. 1 The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the cause, holding that…