State v. Thorpe

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s murder conviction, holding that the trial court did not commit plain error by allowing cross-examination about his prearrest silence. Because the defendant did not preserve the claim, he had to show an obvious, readily discernable, and sufficiently harmful error, and the governing law did not make the evidentiary ruling plainly erroneous. The court concluded that the defendant’s failure to report the shooting or his claimed self-defense before arrest could be used to assess his credibility.