State v. Outlaw

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions for murder, carrying a pistol without a permit, and criminal possession of a firearm. It held that the trial court’s response to an allegedly sleeping juror adequately addressed the misconduct, that improper admission of witness-protection evidence did not result in manifest injustice, and that any error in admitting a cooperating witness’s specific guilty pleas was harmless. The court also held that the prosecutor’s reference to the witness’s acceptance of responsibility did not impermissibly comment on the defendant’s exercise of his jury-trial right. Justice McDonald, concurring in part and dissenting in part, would have found the response to the sleeping juror inadequate, while Justice Ecker, joined by the Chief Justice, agreed the inquiry was inadequate but concurred in the judgment because the trial was not fundamentally unfair.