Kidwell v. State
2012 WY 91
Wyo.2012Background
- Kidwell challenges convictions for false imprisonment and simple assault.
- He alleges prosecutorial misconduct for failing to give pretrial notice of 404(b) evidence.
- Trial occurred January 2011; Andrew Scott testified regarding a planned false testimony, then recanted.
- Scott’s testimony was elicited by the State without prior notice; defense sought mistrial for discovery violation.
- Jury acquitted on kidnapping and felonious restraint; convicted on false imprisonment and simple assault.
- Court upheld convictions and denied relief, finding no plain error or prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did failure to give 404(b) notice amount to misconduct? | Kidwell | Kidwell | No reversible plain error; not prejudicial |
| Is Scott's testimony 404(b) evidence requiring notice? | Kidwell | Kidwell | Not 404(b) evidence; no notice required |
| Was there prejudice given overwhelming direct evidence? | Kidwell | Kidwell | No prejudice; substantial proof supported verdict |
Key Cases Cited
- Howard v. State, 2002 WY 40 (Wy. 2002) (requires notice to trigger Huddleston test under 404(b))
- Schreibvogel v. State, 2010 WY 45 (Wy. 2010) (prosecutorial conduct assessed for denial of fair trial)
- Mazurek v. State, 10 P.3d 581 (Wy. 2000) (plain-error standard for prejudicial impact)
- Talley v. State, 2007 WY 37 (Wy. 2007) (plain-error analysis for prosecutorial misconduct)
- Gleason v. State, 57 P.3d 332 (Wy. 2002) (rules governing 404(b) discovery and admissibility)