State v. James K.

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s conviction, holding that a restriction on voir dire is reversible only when the trial court clearly abuses its discretion and the defendant suffers harmful prejudice. Even assuming the voir dire restriction was an abuse of discretion, the defendant failed to show prejudice. The court also upheld admission of the video-recorded forensic interview because it was probative, not unfairly prejudicial, and the trial court’s balancing could be inferred from the record.