State v. Gibson

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions, concluding that any error in admitting a witness’s prior written statement was harmless because the statement was cumulative and independent evidence strongly implicated the defendant. It also held that the defendant was not denied confrontation because counsel was permitted to question the witness about pending charges and chose not to do so; alternatively, any restriction was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also addressed, without extended discussion, the defendant’s claims concerning a falsus in uno instruction and the sufficiency of the firearm-possession evidence.