|
||||||||
|
|
North
Carolina Reports Page 647 [2] In his second
assignment of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred
in denying the admission into evidence of defendant's exculpatory
statements to police officers. Officer Pettus testified on direct
examination that defendant made certain voluntary statements to him
at the police department several hours after the shooting. On
cross-examination, defendant attempted to question Pettus regarding
prior statements defendant had made at his home. The State objected
on the basis of hearsay, and the objection was sustained. Defendant
contends that he was attempting to elicit from Pettus that defendant
had told him that "he had to shoot Hill, he had no other choice."
Defendant argues that the statement was included in notes and
reports used by Officer Pettus while he was testifying. Defendant
contends that under Rule 612 of the North Carolina Rules of
Evidence, he should have been able to introduce parts of the notes
and reports into evidence. We disagree. Rule 612 provides:
N.C.G.S. § 8C-1, Rule 612 (1992). Rule 612 does not provide for the admission into evidence of writings used to refresh a witness' memory. Under Rule 612, defendant was only entitled to have such writings produced at trial. The admissibility of these writings is subject to the same rules of admissibility that apply to any evidence. Here, the trial court excluded the evidence as inadmissible hearsay. Defendant does not contest the trial court's ruling based on the hearsay objection and poses no arguments in support of admissibility under any exception to the hearsay rule. In fact, defendant makes no argument in his brief for the admissibility of the statement other than the argument based on Rule 612. Since the statement was not admissible under Rule 612, we cannot conclude that the trial court erred by excluding it. This assignment of error is therefore rejected. Page 648 Date Printed: July 6, 1999
|
|||||||
