State v. Arciliares
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of murder in the first degree and other offenses. Defendant appealed, asserting, among other claims of error, that the trial justice erred by deciding to limit the extent to which Defendant was allowed to cross-examine a key police witness, the lead detective in the case. The Supreme Court agreed with Defendant and vacated his convictions, holding (1) the proffered evidence was relevant; (2) the witness’s testimony would not implicate the holding in State v. Harnois; and (3) R.I. R. Evid. 403 would not bar the witness’s testimony. Remanded for a new trial.
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.