State v. McGhee
Annotate this Case
The Supreme Court affirmed Defendant's conviction and sentence for indecent exposure to a minor, holding that the district court did not err in its evidentiary rulings and did not impose and unduly harsh sentence.
On appeal, Defendant argued that the district court erroneously allowed cross-examination of Defendant about a prior allegation of sexual misconduct toward his daughters to rebut his assertion that he previously had an "awesome" relationship with his daughters. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the district court did not err in concluding that Defendant opened the door to the limited cross-examination allowed regarding the otherwise inadmissible allegations; and (2) Defendant's assertion that his sentence was "unduly harsh" was not subject to review on direct appeal.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.