holding that it was reversible error to exclude defendant’s proffered testimony that pimp assaulted her shortly after she delivered cocaine to informer, when offered as to her duress defense
How later courts described this case
- holding that it was reversible error to exclude defendant’s proffered testimony that pimp assaulted her shortly after she delivered cocaine to informer, when offered as to her duress defense
- providing that this standard applies when the accused complains that the exclusion of evidence denied him his constitutional right to a meaningful opportunity to present a defense
- explaining that evidence must be both material and probative to be relevant
- explaining that evidence must be material and probative to be relevant
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WOMACK, J.,
filed a concurring opinion.
I join the judgment of the Court and its opinion, except for the discussion of constitutional principles, ante at 506-507. In my view those principles are not implicated in this case.