WPC8 Vtwg0 fyЄ CorK!!My\iSVfzh=jpiPj&DS;M[sv&%;\Pq4F޶TXuy [`Z<,#n?]N{b )"UDAQ']M)vס!|:>@EA L`ڧ~^R_z|c@cjJ KuDd M LBd /T+ %U.nX 0P4l 0 0chw@U: U:EU:U:  5   " 9 O e { U:    AQ  0D 0D 0DX B D/ B D3<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX%2A`ArialTT3|X<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@%2A`ArialTTt10cpiXXX2PQXP(($D  n~<$   ((2$ !D   ùXXù   0  ("$ X<=XXX  0   [DEUӀg"Arial Regular,rAZ"Arial Regular,rAZ"Arial Regular   ,cAZ"Arial Regular      SHELBYVS Asst Bldg PEAYS.W.2dTuggle2dT.R.A.P.RILEYWOODALL                    !"  XM0XXXXXM0   Ad FILEDXM0X  August19,1999CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdAh ,yAZ"Arial Regular !"#%C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !  ($$   1   d''' dxdP Pd$$$$'dxd !D   D8  TR[A'Legal3'A' Legal3'T  XM0XXX7 M0 XXdXXd7r(<,(j 8` `@EF` ttx0~ rt(>.*jx` `@E` ttx08 tߛ `  INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@9TATJACKSON  @6TMAY1999SESSION STATEOFTENNESSEE, h   )      `     h   )   C.C.A.NO.02C019805CR00142      `  Appellee, h 򀀀  )    `     h   )  SHELBYCOUNTY  x  VS. `     h   ) ^   `     h   )  HON.ARTHURT.BENNETT, D  DERRICKSAYLES, h   )  JUDGE *z   `     h   )   `  `  Appellant.  h   )  (SecondDegreeMurder)  F   FORTHEAPPELLANT: h      p FORTHEAPPELLEE:   JEFFREYS.GLATSTEIN h      p MICHAELE.MOORE @  200Jefferson,Suite1313 h      p SolicitorGeneral &v Memphis,TN38103  ` (OnAppeal)    h      p PETERM.COUGHLAN  B   `     h      p Asst.AttorneyGeneral (  EDWINC.LENOW    h      p JohnSevierBldg.  100NorthMainBldg. h      p 425FifthAve.,North  (#   ЀMemphis,TN38103 h      p Nashville,TN372430493    ` (AtTrial) `     h      p WILLIAML.GIBBONS  V"!  `     h      p DistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h      p JAMESA.WAX,JR.  %X $  `     h      p   and `     h      p PATIENCER.BRANHAM  &$"&  `     h      p Asst.DistrictAttorneysGeneral (#  ' #'  `     h      p 201PoplarAve.,Ste.301 `     h      p Memphis,TN381031947 `     h      p  `     h OPINIONFILED :____________________ .T).  REVERSEDANDREMANDED  1,2  JOEG.RILEY,  N4/5  JUDGE  4506   6j17   ӜXM0XXXM0Oa Oa OaOaOaOadOOaOaOaћ@8T pXXM0OPINION#XM0Xp#Ԉ    ` AjuryfoundthedefendantguiltyoftheseconddegreemurderofMarvinRandolph.Thedefendantnowappeals,raisingthefollowingissuesforourreview:8 `  I.whethertheevidenceissufficienttosupportthedefendantsconviction; ` H!` H! 8 `  II.whetherthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretionbyrefusingtoallowdefensecounseltocrossexamineastatewitnessregardingpossiblepromisesmadeinexchangeforhistestimony; ` H!` H! 8 `  III.whetherthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioninallowingextensivejurorquestioningofastatewitness; ` H!` H! 8 `  IV.whetherthestatecommittedplainerrorbyaskingthedefendantoncrossexaminationwhetherhehadever borrowedsomeonescarwithoutpermission;and ` H!` H! 8 `  V.whethercumulativeerrorrequiresanewtrial. ` H!` H! 8Findingerrorintherefusaltoallowdefensecounseltodevelopimpeachmentproofofthestateskeywitness,we REVERSE and REMAND foranewtrial. 0 @<T FACTS    ` Attrial,AntonioCallicutttestifiedthatontheafternoonofOctober16,1996,whilehewassittingonthefrontporchofhisresidence,hesawthevictim,MartinRandolph,inhiscaratastopsignonthecornerofhisstreet.AccordingtoCallicutt,hesawthedefendant,alsoknownas Baba,rideabicycletothevictimscar,yell Payback,motherf,andshoothimrepeatedly.Callicutttestifiedthatthedefendantwasaccompaniedbyotherindividuals,that [t]heywereshootingthegun,andthatwhenthevictimscarbegantodriveaway, [t]heykeptshootingandthenleftthesceneinaSuburbandrivenbyCoreyRagland.Whenaskedtoclarifywho theywereandwhoshotatthevictim,Callicuttexplainedthatwhilethedefendantwasaccompaniedby somemoreboys,thedefendantwastheonlyoneshooting.Callicutttestifiedthataftertheshooting,hefollowedthevictimscartoalocalPigglyWigglygrocerystore,whereitcrashedintoaparkedcar.Callicuttadmittedhewas̜ 8@4: Oa  currentlyinjailawaitinganindictmentonanaggravatedrobberycharge,butheOa  deniedbeingpromisedanythinginexchangeforhistestimony. ` Oncrossexamination,CallicuttdeniedbeingwithRhondaNichols,afamilyfriend,onthedayoftheshooting.Headmittedhehadapriorconvictionforsolicitationtocommitafelony.Thedefenseattorneyaskedhimseveralquestionsregardinghispriorinconsistenttestimonyatapreliminaryhearing.ThedefenseattorneybasedhisphrasingofCallicuttspriortestimonyonhisownhandwrittennotesfromtheaudiotapeofthepreliminaryhearing.Callicuttflatlydeniedmakingalmostallofthestatementsattributedtohimbydefensecounsel. ` ThedairymanageratthelocalPigglyWigglystoretestifiedthathewaseatinghislunchinhiscarintheparkinglotwhenthevictimscarsmashedintohiscar.Thedairymanagertestifiedheaskedthevictimwhoshothim,andthevictimreplied, Babadidit.Thevictimlaterbledtodeathfromagunshottohislegthatseveredanartery.Aninvestigatingofficertestifiedthataftertheincident,thedefendantadmittedhisnicknamewas Baba. ` Afterthestaterested,RhondaNichols,aclosefriendofCallicuttsfamily,testifiedthatonthedayoftheshooting,Callicuttwasnotathishouse,butratherwaswatchingtelevisionwithherandmembersofhisfamilyathisauntsnearbyhouse.Shetestifiedthatwhentheyheardtheshots,theywentoutsidetoseewhathappened,butthestreetwasemptyofpeopleandcars. ` ThesecurityguardatPigglyWigglytestifiedthatafterthevictimcrashedintotheparkinglot,heaskedhimwhoshothim,andthevictimreplied, RayRay.Hetestifiedthevictimmighthavesaid Baba,butheheard RayRay. ` Thedefendanttestifiedonhisbehalf,denyingthatheshotthevictim,whoheclaimednottohaveknown.Accordingtothedefendant,hespenttheafternoonin 84: Oa  ќquestionathomeandattheBoysClub.HeadmittedthatoneofhisnicknameswasOa   Baba. X/bXXX/bԀ@1T SUFFICIENCYOFTHEEVIDENCE   d  ` Thedefendantcomplainsthattheevidenceisinsufficienttosupporthisconviction.Assupportforhisargument,thedefendantcomplainsthatCallicuttstestimonyisinternallyinconsistent,inthathefirsttestified theyshotthevictim,butthenlatertestifiedthatonlythedefendantshotthevictim.Asthestateconcedes,therecordrevealsthatCallicuttwasaratherinarticulatewitness,whichexplainswhyhewasoftenpromptedbythedistrictattorney,thedefenseattorney,andeventhejurytoexplainhisanswers.#X/bXX X/b## ` ThedefendantalsoassertsthattherecordshowsCallicuttstrialtestimony h wasinconsistentwithhispriortestimonyatapreliminaryhearing.TherecordrevealsthatthedefenseattorneyaskedCallicuttseveraltimesaboutthesubstanceofhispreliminaryhearingtestimony.Defensecounseldidnothaveawrittentranscriptofthepreliminaryhearingtestimony,soherelieduponthenoteshetookwhilelisteningtothepreliminaryhearingaudiotapetophrasewhatherepresentedCallicuttspriortestimonywas.Forexample,thedefenseattorneyasked,8 ` Okay.Andletmeaskyouplease,sir,ifyouwereaskedthesequestionsanddidyougivetheseanswers: ` H!` H! 8 ` 8 ` H!` H!  Question:Whowasdrivingyourcar?Coreywas...andyougavethisanswer. Coreywasinmycaronthenextstreet.    (EachtimethedefenseattorneyquestionedCallicuttinthisway,however,Callicuttdeniedhavingtestifiedthewaythedefenseattorneyrepresentedhehad.Questionsbycounselarenotevidence. ` ThedefendantalsonotesthatCallicuttstestimonyisdirectlycontradictedbyMs.NicholstestimonythatCallicuttwaswithheratthetimeoftheshootinganddid 8(4: Oa  Oa  notwitnessanything.Becausethejury,notthisCourt,decidesquestionsconcerningwitnessescredibility,theweightandvaluegiventoevidence,andallfactualissues,thedefendantssufficiencychallengewillnotsucceedmerelybecauseastatewitnessstestimonyconflictswithadefensewitnessstestimony.SeeStatev.  d Cabbage,571S.W.2d832,835(Tenn.1978).  4  ` ThegistofthedefendantsargumentisthathisconvictionrestsentirelyuponthetestimonyofCallicuttwhosetestimonyisbothincredibleandcontradicted.TherecorddoesnotsupportthedefendantsclaimthatCallicuttstestimonyistheonlyevidenceagainsthim.Tothecontrary,therecordshowsthatshortlyafterthevictimwasshot,hetoldthePigglyWigglydairymanagerthat Babashothim.Thereisampleevidence,includingthedefendantsownadmissionattrial,thatthedefendantis Baba.Granted,theevidencepresentedbythedefendantsquarelycontradictedmuchofthestatesevidence.Itisthejurysduty,however,tosortthroughthosecontradictionsandassigncredibility,andhere,thejuryoptedtoaccreditthestateswitnesses.Becauseareviewoftheevidenceinthelightmostfavorabletothestaterevealsthatarationaltrieroffactcouldhavefoundbeyondareasonabledoubttheessentialelementsofseconddegreemurder,thedefendantssufficiencychallengemustfail.Jacksonv.Virginia,443U.S.307,319,99S.Ct.2781,2789,61L.Ed.2d  %\ $ 560(1979);Statev.Tuggle,639S.W.2d913,914(Tenn.1982). &("& @ .T ATTACKONCALLICUTTSCREDIBILITY  p*%*  `  Thedefendantnextchallengesthetrialcourtsdecisionnottoallowhimtocrossexaminetheprosecutorand/orCallicuttaboutwhetherpromisesweremadeinexchangeforCallicuttstestimonyagainstthedefendant.Therecordshowsthat,afterjuryselectionbutbeforethestatepresentedanyevidence,thebailiffreportedtothetrialjudgethatCallicuttwasrefusingtoenterthecourtroombecausehewasscared.Withthejuryabsentfromthecourtroom,thetrialjudgeorderedCallicutttoenterthecourtroom,andheeventuallycomplied.Callicutttestifiedunderoaththat 8,4: dO  dO  dO  earlierthatmorning,thedefendantthreatenedhimandtoldhimnottotestify.Callicuttalsotestifiedthattwoindividualsvisitedhisgirlfriendandchildathishouseandthreatenedthat somethingwouldhappenifCallicutttestified. ` Callicuttinsistedhedidnotwantto beinvolvedortestifyinthiscase.ThetrialcourtaskedCallicuttifhewouldstillbescaredtotestifyifthecourtreducedhisbondinordertolimithisexposuretothedefendantinjail.Callicuttrepliedthathewouldstillbeexposedtothedefendantifhewasindictedandthedefendantwasconvicted.Hecontinuedtoadamantlyinsistthatoutofhisandhisfamilysbestinterests,hedidnotwanttobeinvolvedinthiscase,evenifthatmeanthewouldbechargedwithperjury. ` Followingarecess,abenchconferencewasheldduringwhichthepartiesdiscussedCallicuttstestimony.ThedefenseattorneyrelatedthatthedefendantdeniedthreateningorevenbeingnearCallicutt.OneoftheprosecutingattorneysreportedthatsheneededtotalktoCallicutttoaskhimforaphonenumberwherehisgirlfriendcouldbereached.Thetrialjudgecalledanotherrecess,suggestingthattheprosecutingattorneymightsendaninvestigatorwithasubpoenatotalktoCallicuttsgirlfriend. ` Afterthesecondrecess,thestateproceededwithitsfirstwitness,thevictimsmother,whosetestimonywasrelativelyshort.Immediatelyfollowinghertestimony,Callicuttwascalledtotestifybeforethejury,whereheproceededtotestifyagainstthedefendantwithoutahintofhesitationorreluctance.TherecorddoesnotexplainCallicuttschangeofheartregardinghistestimony.Callicutttestifiedbeforethejurythathewasnotpromisedanythinginexchangeforhistestimony. ` FollowingCallicuttstestimony,thejuryexitedthecourtroomforarecess.However,priortoCallicuttleavingthecourtroomandpriortoanyrecessbythecourt,oneoftheprosecutingattorneysaddressedthetrialcourt.Hestated, wefeelthat 84: Oa  Oa  Oa  Oa  [Callicutt]testifiedtruthfullyandinlightofthefactthattherehavebeensomethreatsallegedlymade...andIhavereviewedthecaseagainsthim,thestatewouldrecommenda$1,000bailfor[Callicutt].TheprosecutingattorneystatedthatϜ [Callicutts]filejustappearedonmydesk,havingbeengiventohimbyanassistant, notknowingatanytimetheinvolvementthatMr.Callicutthadwiththiscase.TheprosecutingattorneystatedhebelievedCallicuttscasewouldbesubmittedtothegrandjuryassimplerobbery,notaggravatedrobbery.AlthoughnotingCallicutthadapriorfelonyconvictionandnumerousmisdemeanors,hestatedCallicutttestifiedtruthfullyandrecommendeda$1,000bond. ` Thetrialjudgeacceptedthestatesrecommendation,reducingCallicuttsbondaccordingly,andstateditwasdoingsobecauseofthethreatslodgedagainsthimandhisfamilysothat atleast,wecankeepthisdefendantandthiswitnessseparatedaslongaspossible.Thefollowingthentranspired:8 ` 8 ` H!` H![DEFENSEATTORNEY]:Willthatbetoldtothejury?     `  THECOURT:No.Theydontneedtoknowthat.8 ` 8 ` H!` H![DEFENSEATTORNEY]:Becausetheyhadsaidthattherewasnothingthathehasnothingandnowtheyremaking    8 ` 8 ` H!` H![PROSECUTINGATTORNEY]:Hewasnotpromisedanything.Istatedasanofficerofthecourthewasnotpromisedanythingforthat.    8 ` 8 ` H!` H!THECOURT:No.Hewasntpromisedanything.Imdoingthisbasedonthreats.Infact,Imayrecommendgrandjuryproceedingsthatmaygoagainstyourclient.Ivegotitunderadvisement.SoImdoingthisbasedonthreatstohim.Hestestifiedunderoathaswellastheresallegationsthathisfamilymembershavebeenthreatenedtokeephimfromtestifying.Allright.Thatstheendofthat.Itdoesntgobeforethejury.    8 ` 8 ` H!` H![DEFENSEATTORNEY]:Couldwemakeatenderofproofsothatwillbeinthistrialrecord.     `  THECOURT:Proofofwhat?8 ` 8 ` H!` H![DEFENSEATTORNEY]:Tohave[theprosecutingattorney]testifythathesmadearecommendationsotheproofincasethecasegoesupthat     `  THECOURT:Whatdoyoumean?̜ 95; Oa  ћ8 ` 8 ` H!` H![DEFENSEATTORNEY]:Thejuryhasbeentoldthatinitiallyhehadnodealsandnowtheyrecominginafterhestestifiedandrecommendinga$1,000bond.    8 ` 8 ` H!` H![PROSECUTINGATTORNEY]:Hehadnodeal.Imean,Idontknowhowtosaythatanyclearer.     `  THECOURT:Hesalreadytestifiednow. `  [DEFENSEATTORNEY]:Yes,sir.8 ` 8 ` H!` H!THECOURT:Andthecourtisdoingthisbasedonthreatstohim,too.Imtakingthatintoconsiderationmorethananythingelse.Infact,thatsabouttheonlythingaboutreducingthebondtothatamount.Itmayshouldbe[sic]reducedsomeanywayifitsnotgoingtoproceedonaggravatedrobbery.ButthereasonImconsideringa$1,000.00[bond]isbecauseofthesethreatsandhisdemeanor,scaredtocomeinthecourt.Wehadtoforcehiminthecourtbecauseofthesethreats.Andhefinallycamein.Sothatsthecourtsaction.Allright.C     ` Anaccusedhastherighttoexploreoncrossexaminationanypromisesofleniencytotheprosecutionwitnessinordertoshowmotivefortestifyingfalselyforthestate.Statev.Smith,893S.W.2d908,924(Tenn.1994);Statev.Norris,684  S.W.2d650,654(Tenn.Crim.App.1984).Unduerestrictionofthisrightmayviolateadefendantsrighttoconfrontation.Delawarev.VanArsdall,475U.S.673,684,106 V"! S.Ct.1431,89L.Ed.2d674(1986).Evidenceofanyunderstandingoragreementrelatingtothefutureprosecutionofastatewitnessiscertainlyrelevanttocredibility,andthejuryisentitledtoknowofit.Gigliov.UnitedStates,405U.S.150,15455, ' #' 92S.Ct.763,31L.Ed.2d104(1972).Specifically,therefusaltoallowdefensecounselanopportunitytocrossexamineaprosecutionwitnessaboutanagreementwiththestateastofutureprosecutionviolatestheConfrontationClauseoftheSixthAmendment.Delawarev.VanArsdall,475U.S.at679. .:*/  ` InthecaseatbardefensecounseloncrossexaminationofCallicuttdidnotaskhimabouthischangeofheartorapossibleagreementwiththestate.NordidheaskthetrialcourttobeallowedtorecallCallicuttafterthebondrecommendationOa   wasmade.ThismayhavebeenatacticaldecisionasitmighthaveledtotestimonyOa   concerningallegedthreatsbythedefendant.However,thisdoesnotendourinquiry. 95; Oa    ` WhenCallicuttwasfirstcalledintothecourtroom,headamantlyandcontinuallyinsistedthathewouldnottestify,evenifitledtoanothercriminalchargeagainsthim.Thetrialcourtmentionedthepossibilityofareducedbond.OneoftheprosecutingattorneysstatedsheneededtotalktoCallicuttconcerningtheallegedthreattohisgirlfriend.Then,whencalledtotestifybeforethejury,Callicuttobviouslyhadachangeofheartandtestifiedwithoutanyhesitationwhatever.ImmediatelyafterCallicuttstestimony,thestaterecommendedthereduced$1,000bond. ` Thedefendantwasclearlyentitledtoexplorewhat,ifanything,theprosecutingattorneytoldCallicuttpriortohistestifying,andwhethertherehadbeenanagreementbetweenthestateandCallicutt.Specifically,thedefendantwasentitledtodetermineiftheprosecutingattorneytoldCallicuttanythingthatwouldmakeCallicuttthinkhewouldbereleasedonbailorreceiveanyotherfavorabletreatmentifhetestifiedforthestate.SeeGigliov.UnitedStates,405U.S.at15455. (  `  ` Defensecounselproperlyproposedtomakeanofferofproofbyquestioningoneoftheprosecutingattorneys.SeeTenn.R.Evid.103(a)(2).Theprosecuting @#" attorneyarguedtherewasnoagreement,anddefensecounselwasnotallowedtopursueanofferofproof.Wedonotknowwhatwouldhavedevelopedifdefensecounselhadbeenallowedtopursuehisofferofproof.However,themerestatementbytheprosecutingattorneythattherewasnoagreementisinsufficienttodenydefendanttherighttopursueevidencerelatingtothecredibilityofthestateskeywitness.Underthesecircumstances,theonlypossibleremedyisaremandforanewtrial.̜Oa   @0T JURYQUESTIONINGOFCALLICUTT p3.4  Oa    ` Next,thedefendantchallengesthetrialcourtsdecisiontoallowthejurytoOa   posequestionstoCallicutt.Atrialcourthasbroaddiscretionincontrollingthe 804: Oa   conductofatrial.Statev.Gibson,973S.W.2d231,245(Tenn.Crim.App.1997).  Akeyconsiderationforwhetherthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioninallowingjuryquestioningofawitnessiswhetheritwasprejudicialtothedefendant.Statev. H Jeffries,644S.W.2d432,435(Tenn.Crim.App.1982).Thus,atrialcourtabused  d itsdiscretionbyallowingfortytwotranscriptpagesofargumentative,prejudicial,irrelevant,andbiasedquestioningbyseveraljurorswhoassumedtheroleofstatesadvocate.Id.at43435. x   ` Here,therecordrevealsthatneartheendofthedefensecounselscrossexaminationofCallicutt,onejurorspontaneouslyaskedCallicuttaquestion.Thetrialjudgereplied, Dontaskanyquestions.Ifyouhaveaquestion,justposeittous.ThedefensecounselsquestioningofCallicuttresumed,andafewmomentslater,boththedefensecounselandtheprosecutorannouncedtheyhadnomorequestionsforthiswitness.Whilethejurypassedaroundsomepictureexhibits,thepartiesheldabenchconferenceonanunrelatedmatter.Thebailifftheninformedthetrialcourtthatoneofthejurorshadaquestion.Thetrialcourtrequiredthejurortoposethequestiontothecourt,andbeforethewitnessansweredthequestion,thejudgeapprovedit. ` Inall,thejurorsposedsixquestionstoCallicutt.Priortothewitnessansweringthequestions,thetrialcourtscreenedthequestions,givinghisapprovalthatthequestionwasacceptable.Fiveofthesixjurorquestionswererephrasedbyeithertheassistantdistrictattorneyorthetrialcourt,butonewasnot.Ofthesixquestions,onewaspreviouslyaskedandanswered,anotherservedtoclarifythewitnessstestimony,andtheremainderappearedtosolicitnewevidence;however,allofthequestionsweregermanetotheissuesraisedduringthewitnessstestimony.Oa   Afterthreeofthesixquestions,thedefenseattorneyaskedextensivefollowupquestions,eventakingtheopportunityatonepointtotrytoimpeachthewitnesswithhispriorstatementtopolice. 8 4: Oa   ќ ` Weconcludethejuryquestioningwasnotprejudicialtothedefendant.Infact,giventhesubstanceofsomeofthewitnesssanswersandtheadditionalopportunitytoimpeachthewitness,muchofthequestioningbenefitedthedefendant.Assuch,wefindnoabuseofdiscretion.Thisissueiswithoutmerit.  d @ .T PREJUDICIALQUESTIONBYTHESTATE     ̜ ` Finally,thedefendantclaimsthataquestionposedbythestateconstitutedplainerror.Whilecrossexaminingthedefendantduringtrial,thestatequestionedthedefendantabouthisprimarymodeoftransportation,thatis,whetherhehadacarorwhetherherelieduponhisbikeand/orridesfromCoreyRagland.Thedefendanttestifiedthathesometimesdrovehisparentscar.Thestateaskedwhetherhehadeverdrivenanyothercars,andthedefendantrepliedhehad.Thestatethenaskedwhetherhehad borrowedthoseothercarswithoutpermission.Beforethedefendantanswered,thedefenseattorneylodgedageneralobjection,whichwassustained.Theissuewasthendropped;thestateswitchedlinesofquestioning;andthedefendantdidnotrequestanyfurtherremedy,suchasacurativeinstructionormistrial. ` Becausethedefendantdidnotraisethisissueinhismotionfornewtrial,wewillreverseonlyuponafindingofplainerror.SeeT.R.A.P.3(e);Tenn.R.Crim.P. (#( 52(b);Statev.Ogle,666S.W.2d58,60(Tenn.1984).Plainerroriserrorthataffects |*%* the substantialrightsofthedefendantandneedstobecorrectedinorder todosubstantialjustice.Tenn.R.Crim.P.52(b).Thisburdenisnotmetunderthecircumstancesofthiscase.Thisissueiswithoutmerit.Oa    8,4: Oa   @9T CONCLUSION   Oa   Oa    ` Baseduponourexaminationoftherecord,weconcludethedefendantwasOa   improperlydeniedtherighttodevelopevidencerelatingtothecredibilityofthestateskeywitness.Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtis,therefore,REVERSEDandthecaseREMANDEDforanewtrial. `     h  `     h      p 񀀀񀀀񀀀_______________________________ `     h      p JOEG.RILEY,JUDGE  6   CONCUR:  $ ̜(Seeseparatedissentingopinion)______________________________ r \ r  JOHNH.PEAY,JUDGE  X ______________________________ THOMAST.WOODALL,JUDGE