People v. Pacheco

This case presents question as to whether trial court, in instant prosecution on charges of aggravated assault, aggravated fleeing or attempting to elude police officer and DUI, violated defendant’s right to confrontation by limiting his cross-examination of police officer about whether officer had motive to testify falsely and by barring defendant from cross-examining two police officers about their failure to file police reports. Appellate Court found that limitation on cross-examination of officer’s motive to testify falsely required reversal of defendant’s convictions, because said limitation did not sufficiently allow defendant to present his theory of case that said officer had motive to testify falsely in order to protect his employment. Appellate Court further found that trial court abused its discretion in barring defendant from cross-examining two officers about their failure to write police reports about their encounter with defendant, since such testimony was relevant to officers’ credulity as witnesses because it could support inference that officers sought to insulate themselves from potential scrutiny regarding their actions on day of incident.