Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Soto finds a lower court ruled correctly in denying a writ of attachment sought by defendant, who wished to compel a subpoenaed witness to testify in court after defendant was charged with assault and other crimes. That witness, who provided incriminating evidence against defendant during a police investigation, was also heard on bodycam using a racial slur to refer to defendant, who argued the court should have forced her to testify in person so that “the jury could observe her demeanor and judge her credibility when questioned about her racist statement” under the theory that her perception of events could have been tainted by racial bias. But the witness was not the only person to offer incriminating evidence against defendant, and her virtual testimony nonetheless showed that she “lied in court and used the racial slur.” Affirmed.