John Wallace McGinn v. State, 361 P.3d 295

Defendant John McGinn was tried for domestic battery and possession of a weapon with intent to threaten after an incident involving his wife (Shari Swenson) and daughter (K). Photographs showed injuries; he was acquitted of felony child abuse but convicted on the two other counts.
At trial McGinn testified and forcefully denied his wife’s and daughter’s accounts. On cross-examination the prosecutor repeatedly asked McGinn whether his daughter (K) was lying — about 20 such questions — despite defense objections.
The trial court initially overruled objections, later gave a confusing instruction, allowed more questioning, and only after closing declared the questions improper and instructed the jury to disregard them; defense motions for mistrial were denied.
The State had given Rule 404(b) notice and the court admitted evidence that McGinn had discharged his gun in Spring 2012 (allegedly close to his wife's head) as bearing on intent; the record lacked a detailed trial-court balancing explanation under the Gleason factors.
On appeal McGinn argued prosecutorial misconduct for the “was she lying” questioning and that the court abused its discretion admitting the prior-discharge evidence. The Wyoming Supreme Court reversed the convictions for prosecutorial misconduct and remanded for further proceedings on admissibility of 404(b) evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1. Whether prosecutor's "was she lying" questions were prejudicial	State conceded questions were improper but argued error was harmless given evidence	McGinn argued questioning invaded jury role, was pervasive, and prejudiced credibility on central issues	Court: Questions were severe, pervasive, central to credibility, not cured by instructions — prejudicial; conviction reversed
2. Whether trial court abused discretion admitting prior gun-discharge (404(b)) evidence	State argued prior discharge was proper 404(b) evidence of intent and gave notice	McGinn argued prejudicial nature and lack of required balancing findings	Court: Admission lacked required on-the-record probative v. prejudice weighing; remanded for proper Gleason analysis
3. Burden allocation for harmless-error in prosecutorial-misconduct claims	State urged continued Wyoming rule: appellant must show prejudice	McGinn urged shifting burden to State to prove lack of prejudice	Court: Declined to change precedent; application of existing harmless-error test affirmed (but reversed here on facts)
4. Adequacy of curative instructions after improper questions	State contended jury instructions and later admonition cured error	McGinn argued instructions came too late and were ineffective given pervasive misconduct	Court: Instructions were insufficient given lapse and pervasiveness; did not cure prejudice

Barnes v. State, 249 P.3d 726 (Wyo. 2011) (‘‘was she lying’’ cross-examination improper; factors for harmless-error analysis)
Schreibvogel v. State, 228 P.3d 874 (Wyo. 2010) (prohibition on witnesses commenting on another witness’s veracity)
Beaugureau v. State, 56 P.3d 626 (Wyo. 2002) (jury province to determine credibility; limits on attacking others’ veracity)
Gleason v. State, 57 P.3d 332 (Wyo. 2002) (Vigil/Gleason four-part test for admissibility of uncharged misconduct evidence)
Carroll v. State, 352 P.3d 251 (Wyo. 2015) (example of thorough district-court Gleason analysis upheld on review)
Vigil v. State, 926 P.2d 351 (Wyo. 1996) (procedural framework for prior-bad-acts admissibility)
Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750 (U.S. 1946) (harmless-error principles; burden considerations)