Appellate panel hears challenge to eyewitness 'threat' question and 11‑month sentence in Earl Manny case

Summary

At oral argument, counsel for appellant Earl Manny said a prosecutor’s question that a witness describe conduct 'as a threat' improperly injected lay opinion and shifted the jury’s perspective; the state argued the witness’s 'I didn't see any threat' remark was perception‑based and that sentencing fell within the trial court’s discretion. The court recessed to Dec. 18.

An appellate panel on oral argument heard lawyer Logan Davis say the conviction of Earl Manny for voluntary manslaughter was tainted when the only eyewitness was allowed, over objection, to answer whether the victim acted "as a threat," a formulation Davis said required impermissible opinion testimony rather than permissible observations.

"This case stems from a voluntary manslaughter conviction after a trial where defendant Mr. Earl Manny asserted a self defense argument at the trial," Davis told the court, and he said the key evidentiary objection was preserved in the record through repeated defense objections during the prosecutor’s questioning. Davis argued that the witness’s testimony "shifted the jury’s perspective from his subjective belief to the witness’s subjective belief," which he said undercut the defendant’s…

Appellate panel hears challenge to eyewitness 'threat' question and 11‑month sentence in Earl Manny case

Summary

Subscribe to keep reading