P. v. Walker
Woodrow Terrance Walker appeals a judgment following a jury verdict convicting him of one count of resisting an executive officer (Pen. Code., § 69)[1] and one count of battery on an officer (§ 243, subd. (b)). Walker contends the trial court abused its discretion by halting his cross-examination of a witness and commenting that the witness's prior statement was ambiguous, rather than inconsistent. He argues the court violated his rights to confront a witness and present a complete defense. We conclude Walker forfeited these claims on appeal because he did not raise the issues at trial. Nevertheless, we conclude the court's curtailment of the cross-examination and ambiguity comment were not an abuse of discretion, and even if the court erred, the error was harmless.
Comments on P. v. Walker