Indiana Supreme Court· 11/2/2005

State v. Wilson

Citations

836 N.E.2d 407
2005 Ind. LEXIS 984
2005 WL 2863164

How courts have described this case

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

providing that “[a]n offer of proof should show the facts sought to be proved, the relevance of that evidence, and the answer to any objection to exclusion of the evidence.”
providing that “[a]n offer of proof should show the facts sought to be proved, the relevance of that evidence, and the answer to any objection to exclusion of the evidence.”
providing that the purpose of an offer of proof is to provide the trial judge the opportunity to reconsider the prior evidentiary ruling and to preserve the issue for review by the appellate court
“I’ll give you a chance to make an offer of proof, but quite frankly, you’ve already done so right now.”
“[A]n offer of proof must be sufficiently specific to allow the trial court to determine whether the evidence is admissible and to allow an appellate court to review the correctness of the trial court’s ruling and whether any error was prejudicial.”
“Neither on direct appeal nor on transfer to this Court does Woods make any attempt to explain why he violated the terms of his probation. More importantly, Woods did not make an offer of proof to the trial court. Generally this failure is fatal to his claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Boehm, Shepard, Dickson, Sullivan, Rucker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.