State v. Gibson

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions, holding that any error in admitting a witness’s prior written statement was harmless because the statement was not necessary to place the defendant at the crime scene and independent evidence supported the robbery convictions. It also held that the defendant was not denied confrontation because the trial court permitted cross-examination about the witness’s pending charges and penalties; alternatively, any restriction was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. No separate opinions were filed.