State v. Ortiz

Summary

The court held that the witness-tampering statute permits a jury to consider an attempt to stop a potential witness from speaking with police as evidence of an intent to influence the witness's testimony at a future official proceeding. The statute nevertheless requires proof that the defendant believed an official proceeding was pending or probably would occur and intended to induce the witness to engage in prohibited conduct at that proceeding. Applying that rule, the court concluded that the evidence supported the defendant's conviction because his threats, knowledge of the police investigation, and conduct demonstrated the requisite belief and intent. No separate opinions were filed.