Unsigned
Baxter appealed from a judgment of conviction for criminal possession of a weapon and resisting arrest. The panel reviewed Baxter's evidentiary challenge to the County Court's denial of his request for an order to produce a proposed inmate witness at trial as that contention was properly before the panel. It found Baxter made the requisite showing under Criminal Procedure Law §630.10, and the court abused its discretion in refusing to order the production of the subject inmate witness whose testimony Baxter sought to present at trial. The panel also noted there was no fingerprint evidence in this case, and the issue of Baxter's guilt turned primarily on the testimony of two detectives. It stated it could not countenance the court's refusal to permit Baxter to present testimony of a witness who might have supported Baxter's version of events, thus reversed, granting Baxter a new trial. The dissent disagreed noting Baxter failed to offer any proof regarding the substance of the proposed testimony of the inmate witness. It stated, to the contrary, Baxter merely hinted the witness might provide character testimony, and might have unspecified information about the facts, without stating the nature or source of such information. Thus, the dissent voted to affirm the conviction.
