Ketrow v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that proffer is necessary to preserve point for appeal; otherwise appellate court would have to speculate \as to what someone might have said\
• explaining that the rule requiring a proffer of proposed evidence “prevents an appellate panel from speculating as to what someone might have said or what some document might have contained, as well as what effect, if any, it may have had on the result”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).