Wyoming Supreme Court

Sammy Dean Martinez, Appellant (defendant) v. the State of Wyoming, Appellee (plaintiff)

May 22, 19801980 Wyo. LEXIS 274

Summary

The court affirmed Martinez’s conviction, holding that the requirements for taking the witness’s deposition were met and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding her unable to attend trial. It also concluded that admitting the deposition did not violate the Sixth Amendment because counsel had effectively cross-examined the witness and no new, significant line of inquiry was indicated.

Holding

  • Whether the prerequisites for taking Terwey’s deposition under Rule 17(a) were satisfied.. The showing that Terwey had sustained a skull fracture and other injuries and that her doctor advised her not to come to court for at least six weeks was sufficient to establish that she might be unable to attend. The other Rule 17(a) requirements were adequately met, and Martinez had not objected to the taking of the deposition.
  • Whether the deposition could be used at trial consistently with Rule 17(e) and the Sixth Amendment.. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding Terwey unable to attend or testify because of sickness or infirmity, and admission of her deposition did not violate the confrontation right.

Docket 5212

Cited authorities

  • Rule 17(a) of the Wyoming Rules of Criminal Procedure
  • Rule 17(a)
  • Rule 17(a)
  • Rule 17(a)
  • Rule 17(a)
  • Rule 17(a)
  • Rule 17(e)
  • Rule 17(e)

Cited by