State v. Lanier

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s burglary conviction, holding that the trial court reasonably limited cross-examination about the victim’s probation without preventing the defense from presenting its theory that the victim fabricated his allegations. The court also held that, even assuming the evidentiary limitation was an abuse of discretion, the defendant failed to show harmful error because the state presented substantial corroborating evidence and the defense otherwise impeached the victim and argued the alleged motive. The court concluded that the excluded probation-condition evidence was unlikely to have meaningfully affected the verdict.