S.D.G. v. State

OPINION

O’NEILL, Justice.

In this juvenile case, S.D.G.,1 a minor, appeals a finding that he engaged in delinquent conduct on the grounds that the trial court (1) allowed the testimony of fact and expert witnesses who were not identified in interrogatory answers, (2) unreasonably limited the time in which to conduct voir dire, *374and (3) admitted evidence without a proper predicate. We affirm.

Background

On May 4, 1994, appellant and several of his friends2 skipped school and spent the day with a man known only as “L.L.” Appellant and the other boys each had guns and were playing with them when one…